TinyPortal

What does everyone think about using something similar to this on the beta forum when they originally post an issue or problem? Obviously I stole this from the phpBB boards when I was a regular there before finding out about SMF. Be that as it may, I adapt it to use no matter what support board I happen to be on simply because it gives enough information from the start that those trying to help at least know a few concrete facts about your machine, php-related software, SMF, and TP set up.

If anyone thinks it's worth the bother, we can discuss and refine the outline to be whatever we wish to gather enough information to begin thinking about trying to help someone even before we know their SMF/TP issue(s) and if their installation is even capable of running SMF/TP from a machine and/or hosting perspective. In addition, it would just allow us a more organized way to help each other, and eventually other users as the beta corps becomes more versed in the SMF/TP integration... :P

If we do adopt something similar to this, maybe Bloc could create an 'Installation Specs' forum where testers posted ONLY the outlines of their specs and nothing else. Kind of make it an unspoken guideline that if you want to beta test, you must post your specs kind of thing without being too awfully ridgid about it. If they truly wish to test properly and effectively, they'll post. If they won't take time or don't have the patience to submit an outline, they probably won't make a very good tester anyway because they probably aren't that detail oriented, which is pretty much the hallmark of a good beta tester, at least in my experience anyway.

And finally, by having these outlines available to us, when a given tester has issues and you aren't familiar with them or their specs, simply jump to the Specs forum and find their pertinent information quickly, without having to wade through other non-topic posts.

Just a thought... ;)

• URL:the url to the site you're having problems with if applicable and not a localhost  (//http://)
• What kind of site is it: Localhost test bed, remotely hosted, remote dedicated server, co-located, etc.
• Do you have administrative rights to the server (whether local or remote): for installing software, chmodding files, ftp access, etc.
• Version of SMF used: Self-explanatory, but for example: v1.1beta3
• TinyPortal version used: Probably 0.6.5 at the moment since you're posting on this forum
• Template(s) and version(s) used: Helios_Multi11, Helios_TP, Oxygen v1.0.5, whatever
• Any and all MODs and/or addOns and their version(s): Pretty self-explanatory
• Linux version: Mandrake v10, for instance (only one I remember from when I was messing around with Linux)
• Windows version: XP Pro 5.1.2600 SP2, for instance
• What kind of browser(s) do you use and the version(s): For gauging cross-platform issues
• Amount of system RAM: As for anything else, the more the better. In some cases, problem might stem from insufficient system RAM, especially on localhost test beds or home hosting servers
• Available HDD space: For judging if it might be a lack of space and/or swap file issue with their system environment
• Version of PHP: 4.3.3, for instance
• Version of Apache: 2.0.47, for instance
• Which database server and version: MySQL 4.0.15, for instance
• Did someone install this for you/who: Self-install, or whoever did if for you
• Is this an upgrade/from what to what: N/A
• Is this a conversion/from what to what: N/A
• Have you searched for your problem: Yes. I always search pretty exhaustively before asking.
• Have you read the SMF and TinyPortal documentation: Yes or no
• Do you have a test account for us: Good if you can do this, but not absolutely essential

Also, I've been thinking about the SMF copyright debate raging over there (and yes, I will post this there as well, but since many of us frequent both boards, I just wanted to test-the-water here, so to speak). I thought that maybe we could just gently boycott those asking for help, but not willing to display the copyright on their sites as according to license (i.e. if you surf to their site to help them and don't see the SMF copyright notice on the site). We could politely, but firmly, advise them that we will not help them unless they put back the SMF copyright and comply fully with the licensing restrictions concerning that copyright. It works really well for the folks at phpBB, Nukecops, Nuke Forums, and all those related sites.

If we do it gently and don't take the Unknown 'Maxwell's Silver Hammer' route (no offense intended toward Unknown--each of us has our own way of doing things) and beat them over the head, there might be more compliance. If they can't get help, they'll either display the copyright or switch to another product--pretty cut and dried, plain and simple. I know this approach would lose SMF a few current users initially, and possibly some potential future users via word-of-mouth. However, not as many, I'm thinking, as Unknown verbally beating them up on the forums with the above mentioned hammer...   :knuppel2:. And surprisingly, this approach seems to have attracted users to phpBB related portals. Those in need want help, and they are willing, in most cases, to do what it takes to get that help... /shrugs

Thoughts? Comments?

Cheers!
Ci

The idea of details is great, although I don't think I will NOT answer anyone that don't have these things...but it would help of course. Especially what TP theme they are using, what SMF version and what TP version. Those are essential.

The thing about TP is that it is a mod, and relies heavily on SMF itself. If it works in SMF, it will work in TP too. The custom routines I have written are different of course, but I try to stay within the coding style and suggestions that the SMF script use - to be sure they run as smoothly as possible. No object progamming for example. The last thing Ii want, is a portal that "drags SMF behind it by the ears". ;D. It should rather be an extension of it, not bringing it down on speed too much either.  I have to say, when MKPortal showed up, I was very excited (this was before any TP was planned) , but utterly disappointed how it just took SMF and pushed it in a spot. SMF never knows what's going on. Not so with TP. SMF knows when TP is running, just like any other mod/extension.

Getting long this..Ciinien, you have that effect it seems.. ;D

Want to mention the copyright thing though..I have been in that discussion, and while I can see its good to be a bit more gentle about it, I totally agreed with [Unknown]. If they ask nicely, no-one will leave it intact, it has to be some force. If I see some site with removed of SMF copyright, I will ask them if they are aware of it. Threats I leave up to the support team on simplemachines.org. :)

I have in fact said to at least one person that removing the TP copyright(although I am not so strict as to apply legal act) will mean an end to support from here - and access to beta files. It was only that once though, the person changed back fast and is now on another portal instead .. ;)

Sorry about spreading the dreaded verbosity disease there, Bloc. I know I tend to ramble a lot, but old habits are hard to break...  ;).

The outline thing was just an idea, again, no biggie, just trying to help standardize things for all of us. And if it sounded like I was saying someone who didn't post an outline shouldn't be helped, I misspoke myself. I simply meant that those serious about proper beta testing would do so just to supply information others could use to help them.

I also agree with what Unknown is saying, I just differ a little with his methods, that's all. He's Lead Developer so can do whatever he likes of course. I was just trying to offer a more laid back alternative.

/me goes to his special corner to lurk more and post less...  :2funny:

Cheers!
Ci

           I have absolutely agree to you Ciinien.

Quote from: kerchey on September 02, 2009, 07:40:25 AM
           I have absolutely agree to you Ciinien.

Care to elaborate on that? its an 4 year old topic you know.

Oh, and I removed that unfortunate link under your post. ;)

Quote from: Bloc on September 02, 2009, 07:47:39 AM
Oh, and I removed that unfortunate link under your post. ;)

@Bloc.  How very humorous. ;D

ZP