Policy on unsupported hacks?

[joeychgo]

That might not be the best way of doing it - im sure it could be tweaked - but I dont see how that would stop people from releasing hacks -

Hack ownership wouldnt be removed. What im saying is that if you write a hack for 3.0 - but its unusable on 3.6 - then you own the hack for 3.0 and have first rights to update for vuture versions of vB. But if you dont update and give no indication of intention to update, and the hack is unusable for current versions of the software, then someone else can make it usable so long as they give you credit as the original creator.

Basically - if you release - then ignore - someone else can recreate so its usable for new versions of vb.

[TruthElixirX]

Originally Posted by da420

^^ Personally, I see a lot of problems that could occur with that. Even though it's great - in theory.

But, this removes ownership of the code from the author to vbulletin.org upon release. I see that causing many problems, and may deter many hacks from being released here at vbulletin.org.

I think they should do what he suggested, but with an option to opt out. So its that way be default but you can say "Hey, no way."

[rjmjr69]

If it becomes deserted for more than 90 days then it should be reverted to the community's property. Just like leaving your car at the repair shop dont come back in 90 days "example" car's getting sold.
Now I agree that removes the ownership BUT if you really want to own something then you as the owner have the burden to keep track of it. And I would also make sure the original author still gets credit for the base code he has abandoned. Thats the true essence of the deal here. People are posting code and then abandoning it leaving it orphaned Possession here should be 9/10's of the code law.......lol

[da420]

Originally Posted by rjmjr69

If it becomes deserted for more than 90 days then it should be reverted to the community's property. Just like leaving your car at the repair shop dont come back in 90 days "example" car's getting sold.

But, this isn't a repair shop. This is a community where people offer their time and knowledge to provide hacks for forum administrators, and end users. They are providing US a service, not the other way around.

[joeychgo]

But the problem is this...

I have a forum -- I install a hack that adds functionality my members come to enjoy and expect.

vB is upgraded - that hack is no longer functional -

That hack is not being upgraded by the owner -

Now what does the forum owner do? - now all those forum owners who installed it are SOL

Thats why I say - there should be right of first refusal - but if the hack author abandons the hack - another coder should be able to step in and recode so it works with the new version of vB.

The method we go about to make that happen is a second question - Clearly the hack author should be notified before this happens - and given a chance to upgrade himself. He should also be given credit for his creation.

[RedTyger]

What if a modification doesn't need updating? Many modifications from 3.5.x still work fine with the latest version of 3.6.x without any changes.

I agree that there should be some kind of mandatory distinction between supported and unsupported otherwise what's the point of marking either way? I've seen unsupported hacks that are well supported and supported hacks that haven't seen a reply from the author in 6 months or more.

One way I can think of would be to give the option for users who have installed a supported modification to nominate it as unsupported if they aren't getting any support. After X votes, it sends an email to the author asking if they're still supporting it and if not, could they change the supported tag. If there's no response (to the email or in the thread) from the author then the change is automatically made.

[joeychgo]

But whether the hack says supported or unsupported isnt the problem. The problem is that people make hacks, some of them become popular, and forum owners find themselves screwed when they upgrade.

I just upgraded a forum from 3.0 to 3.67 and I have a hack that doesnt work now. (timeslips) I have a DB full of entries into that hack, and its unusable for me now because there is no real conversion available. My members have come to enjoy that feature.. What do I do?

[RedTyger]

Do without? Hire someone to fix the plugin? To an extent it's an inevitability, if you don't want problems with upgrades then don't modify your forum. Jelsoft themselves will tell you that.

I appreciate the troubles of your situation but people's work can't be comandeered for convenience no matter how long it's left for, I can't imagine that vB.org would ever allow anything along the lines of what people are suggesting here.

[joeychgo]

Im not saying comandeered. Im saying converted with full credit given to the author. And thats assuming the original author either doesnt want to or abandons it.

As far as the 'do without' -- then why install any hack? Why not just shut this site down since thats the safest thing to do.

I agree consideration has to be given to the hack author, but there also needs to be consideration for the forum owner.

[rjmjr69]

Then maybe after a certain time of being unsupported to cure this matter archive the the mod and end it there. This hit and run with posting mods is ridiculous and Jelsoft has to do something about it to keep the MEMBERS happy we drive this place start alienating your members and see where that leads.