💬 Platform Discussion XenForo 2.3 preview

[Cedric]

Another HYS:

Automate workflows with webhooks​

 

[Cedric]

Two more HYS:

XF 2.3 - Embed your content anywhere

This week, we're delighted to introduce a new feature in XenForo 2.3 that enhances the way you can share content on your forum. Plus, we'll show you how easy it is to share any content from your forum to other platforms using our new content embedding feature. Rich previews for content If...

xenforo.com

XF 2.3 - Miscellaneous changes for XenForo 2.3

Due to time constraints and family matters, this is a slightly different HYS to what was planned, but it is still a bumper feast of new features coming in XenForo 2.3. This week we will be mostly focusing on a bunch of smaller new changes and improvements we're no less excited to show you in the...

xenforo.com

 

[Tracy]

All these are fine and good... but I haven't really seen anything that improves the user interaction.
Nor have there been anything about the Gallery, the RM or ES that have been neglected for more years than the XF script.

 

[Cedric]

XF 2.3 - Single sign on and more with OAuth2 in XenForo 2.3

We're approaching the conclusion of the 'Have you seen...?' series for XenForo 2.3. While it may seem like a bittersweet moment, we've intentionally saved one of the most exciting revelations until last. In the upcoming weeks, we might delve into a few more miscellaneous changes and improvements...

xenforo.com

• Single sign on between your forum and another XenForo installation
• Single sign on between your forum and another software
• Building a different front end for your forum, such as a single page app
• Building a native smartphone app for your forum
• Integration between your forum and another application
• Accessing the XenForo REST API as a specific user with a OAuth token

 

[Tracy]

STILL have not seen anything that is earth-shattering on the end user aspect. Once more, XenForo developers have simply re-enforced my position that they are more into the "developer" (as from 3rd party extensions) of their script than functions that will benefit the every day end user.
I don't care how big of a big "rah-rah" supporter of XF that you are... you will have a hard time defending how they have <not> extended their script, (after 3 friggin years), to benefit the actual end users of the script (the actual members). They offer NO important advances.

 

[Cedric]

STILL have not seen anything that is earth-shattering on the end user aspect. Once more, XenForo developers have simply re-enforced my position that they are more into the "developer" (as from 3rd party extensions) of their script than functions that will benefit the every day end user.
I don't care how big of a big "rah-rah" supporter of XF that you are... you will have a hard time defending how they have <not> extended their script, (after 3 friggin years), to benefit the actual end users of the script (the actual members). They offer NO important advances.

I'm the same. At this point I wouldn't bother upgrading to 2.3. Really hoping there's more groundbreaking updates coming, but so far, I'm quite disappointed in them. Maybe I'm reflecting too much with Invision, but still, given the time XF has had so far, the development is a letdown.

 

[Tracy]

Maybe I'm reflecting too much with Invision, but still, given the time XF has had so far, the development is a letdown.

I really don't think so.. I personally think they sat on their laurels (in other words, their asses) thinking they were the "best thing ever" and it's finally coming back to bite them in the arse. At one point, they were the script to target... but they started getting WAY to involved in what benefited developers that could extend their script (when THEY should have been the ones extending it).... and now their resting on their laurels are biting them in it (in other words, biting them in the ass).
They have this fixation on forcing other 3rd party developers to extend their script... it seems that they have a fear of doing so in case it might "offend" others? There is a term about pushing off onto others to do what you should do yourself.... and it fully applies to XenForo developers currently. A LARGE percentage of their license base could not give a shit about how much easier it makes for 3rd party developers to "extend/work" with the script... they care more about what it offers their ultimate clients... the END USERS.
But apparently the XF developers are simply to dense to realize that. It is a fixation that many developers fall into... that of the "coding developer" and not the "end user benefit".

 

[Arantor]

There is a reason why they’ve always pushed stuff to third party: Kier in particular learned from the vB3 kitchen sink approach and the many problems it caused.

Combine that with an ideological “we’re a forum first and foremost” and you have a recipe for trouble.

Mind you I’d suggest that being able to hook up multiple forums together as a forum network is actually a powerful idea, though I realise you think it unimportant because it doesn’t benefit you.

 

[Tracy]

forum network is actually a powerful idea, though I realise you think it unimportant because it doesn’t benefit you.

Still avoids the point of working to make it easier on the end user. Frequently they are already members of other sites they want to be and couldn't give a crap about what the administrator of a site thinks they should be able to join up to.
They care more about "how easy is it to upload an image" and have it be able to be used elsewhere in the site without jumping through hoops or having to upload the image again in another area because they cannot easily re-use the one they just uploaded into another area. Or searching through posts based upon custom fields that detail pertinent data to the niche that allows them to narrow the search pattern down by more exacting criteria.

You know, simple stuff like that that it seems gets regularly ignored (even when suggestions have been made).

 

[Arantor]

(even when suggestions have been made)

All the take-away from this is 'don't bother implementing the single most requested suggestion because users don't want it'.

 

[Tracy]

All the take-away from this is 'don't bother implementing the single most requested suggestion because users don't want it'.

Yeah, webhooks only 1/2 way implemented... issues with the SSO choices they made (when compared to what was suggested). Once more, back to the "we give them the stub, let other developers extend it".

 

[Arantor]

Yeah, webhooks only 1/2 way implemented

I just read the blog post, I have no idea what half you think is missing, but that would assume you actually understand the problem being solved here.

 

[Tracy]

I just read the blog post, I have no idea what half you think is missing, but that would assume you actually understand the problem being solved here.

Bidirectional... they are aware of the issue but not concerned about it. I figured you would have caught that fairly quickly. A limited implementation that they have been called out on even by some fairly prolific XF developers. In fact, I think they even admitted it was only 1/2 way implemented ultimately.

 

[Arantor]

They already have one, that's literally what the API is. It's an incoming API which is 'you do a thing based on an event'. There's a semantic difference on some level (i.e. it's not called a webhook) but that's what it amounts to: a thing you call, with some proof of you being authorised to do so, with a specifically structured request (because every webhook accepter has a specific format) and something will happen.

I figured you would have understood that but you have an axe to grind.

 

[Tracy]

They already have one, that's literally what the API is. It's an incoming API which is 'you do a thing based on an event'. There's a semantic difference on some level (i.e. it's not called a webhook) but that's what it amounts to: a thing you call, with some proof of you being authorised to do so, with a specifically structured request (because every webhook accepter has a specific format) and something will happen.

I figured you would have understood that but you have an axe to grind.

Sorry to burst your bubble... but they have admitted that they did not fully think out that process... and have been called out on it by long time XF developers with a LOT more experience coding for XF than you have.

My "axe to grind" is that lately XF developers have done stuff half-assed. And it's been pointed out time and time again. Look at the time they wasted on their "dark style/new engine"... never even apparently realizing what a major revision that was and instead wanting to push it into 2.3 because it "was a neat thing to do".... then reallity struck.
Custom fields that can't be searched using their ES add-on.
Mirroring an image from a node into a gallery but not mirroring associated custom field data that is associated with it, nor even the description (at least it uses the same attachment).
The inability to set image size allowances in the forum separate from those in the gallery.
The inability to use the same attachment in multiple locations, requiring you to upload it again each time, with each upload being a separate instance taking up additional space (the argument is "space is cheap" is a cop-out).
The insistence in XFRM that a person adding a resource is the "author" (when in reality they are only the submitter of said resource in many instances but this is a carry over from XFRM being written for their site use primarily). Luckily this can be handled fairly easily by a TMS edit.
The awkward way to get to personal galleries in XFMG.
I could go on and on with many other little things like this that were not completely thought out... and have been ignored for years.

IPS and Wotlab both are bringing more to the table for end users than XenForo has in the past several years.

 

[Arantor]

No bubble, just I come from a world where I actually write these things on both sides and interact with these things with real systems, and they're *all* just as wonderfully engineered as XF is describing: i.e. what you're calling half-assed. They're all like that. The bigger they are the worse they are.

*shrug* As usual you're not interested in having an actual discussion, you'd made up your mind long before coming here, and it's not like I have any hat in the ring either way.

 

[Tracy]

nd they're *all* just as wonderfully engineered as XF is describing: i.e. what you're calling half-assed. They're all like that. The bigger they are the worse they are.

Thank you for emphasizing my point... it should NOT be half-assed in implementation. If you are going to do something, take the time to do it "right".

As usual you're not interested in having an actual discussion, you'd made up your mind long before coming here, and it's not like I have any hat in the ring either way.

If you are going to push the "status quo" as being what is acceptable, then no, we don't have anything to discuss. I prefer to think that with the past history of XenForo, they would prefer to do something "right" than "half-assed".... but reality is starting to show that they are not any different than most other companies.... look for the quick easy way out and then say "see, we gave you this", even if it's not a fully thought out integrated solution and you have to jake-leg solutions to work.
I mean... come on... we've already waited THREE FRIGGING YEARS (in some of these cases over a DECADE) for some of this stuff. What would waiting another 6 months to do it RIGHT entail other than them riding some heat because they've been spinning on their thumbs and now are in a rush to provide something as they see the drip drip drip of license holders draining away?
I'm currently on the heels of the choosing either IPS for one of my sites and WoltLab for the other, or IPS for both of them. Normally XenForo would have been my first selection for both of those sites (and is what one of them is currently running). I see XenForo bringing almost nothing to the table of the site user to make their life easier... that thing that keeps our sites breathing. What they have announced will ONLY affect a small number of sites, usually those that want to link multiple of their sites with others that they own or are associated with - and that number actually isn't that high.

 

[cdub]

IPS and Wotlab both are bringing more to the table for end users than XenForo has in the past several years.

Grass is always greener. You're getting quite worked up. If you want to switch switch.

 

[Arantor]

Grass is always greener. You're getting quite worked up. If you want to switch switch.

He won't do that because a) there's no 'forever' option for self hosting on IPS and b) he'll complain about choices IPS made a decade or more ago as why IPS can *never* be trusted, mostly because Tracy's definition of 'lifetime licence' doesn't match for 'lifetime of the product'

 

[Tracy]

You're getting quite worked up. If you want to switch switch.

The point actually is I DON'T want to swtich, but I would like to see some end user benefits like enhanced discovery, being able to search fields/data points that are already collected and similar stuff worked on instead of a few big (and most likely not widely used) things being implemented. I laugh at a lot of the folks... they tell you to "shut up and sit at the back of the bus, we don't want to hear your input/suggestions", yet the very thing they are creaming their britches about are from those folks that spoke loudly in support of something that they may have had interest in. There's a phrase for folks like that.
Actually for the pipe site still trying to determine which one to go with and leaning towards IPS as I can make use of Pages on it (as I did originally). As I stated, the Astro site is pretty much locked into what it is because of the dependence on the extensive 3rd party apps that would take time for me to develop equivalent of in Pages or money to have a Pages equivalent coded.
I also have to decide if I want to run down that road of running multiple sites again, because I have 3 domains of interest to me, and none of them are associated with each other.
It's more frustrating than anything. How long has the editor been known to have issues? When did they finally acknowledge it and start "looking for alternatives". AFAIK, there has been editor issues for a couple of years.

Take a look out in their suggestion area... suggestions from a decade or more ago, some of which would not apply now and there has been no action taken on them (either closing them or showing as not planned or already implemented). Simply doing some good housecleaning in that area would make it even more beneficial as you don't have to filter through XF 1.x specific suggestions that are no longer applicable in most cases.


Folks getting into XF need to know it's VERY dependent upon 3rd party add-ons to do much more than basic offerings now. You pay $55 for an ES add-on to enhance your content discovery... but if you really want it to work well, you pay another $60 for a 3rd party add-on for the 1st party add-on to get it to do basics that it should already be doing, but even then it misses a lot of content that can be created and SHOULD be searchable/discoverable.

I run 43 add-ons... of those, only 10 are for features that are not offered by XF. All the rest of them are to extend basic features that that they offer in the core script to provide more usability of those base functions. And I'm an add-on minimallist as much as possible.

there's no 'forever' option for self hosting on IPS and

Incorrect... all you know for SURE is you will get it for 2 years.... you MAY get it for longer, but there is no written guarantee of that. What you DO know is they have already TOLD you that standalone is on it's last breath. And they have strongly indicated version 5.x will be the last of it. Realistically you may get upwards of 4 years... but the decade that certain partaies claimed are a (pardon the pun) pipe fantasy. Why should I spend a lot of time (and money) investing in IPS on a site that most likely will not be able to be self-hosted in 2-5 years (more likely the lower end of the scale) when I KNOW that the standalone script is on it's knees with its head on the chopping block?
It's referred to as making long term plans instead of the "oh, this makes me feel good right now, screw the future" plan making.
And when one is already running an environment to self-host in and have the abilities to do it, it's rather wasteful to pay someone else to do what you are already doing.

I have no issues with them killing their standalone script... I've seen the "quality" of many of those "admins" that ran IPS back when I ran it (they were more like site managers), and they couldn't server administer themselves out of a wet paper bag, so I can see where the support load(s) would be running IPS ragged. Many of them had hard enough times even with shared hosting. So for those type "admins" the SaaS is a VERY viable option. In fact, if I was only running one site, I'd probably strongly contemplate an SaaS offering, as it allows more "me" time.
Of course, the ultimate "simple" solution is you tell those license holders "sorry, that's a server administration issue, not covered by your licensed support", but then that makes the license holders upset. Since I only needed their support 1 or 2 times (that were directly script related issues) I can't speak much to the quality other than I had no complaints with those instances of support.
XenForo support has no issues at all telling their license holders similar. If it's server related, you need to engage outside services if you can't handle it yourself.