| Author |
 Topic  |
|
cladon
Junior Member
Belgium
110 Posts |
 Posted - 31 August 2005 : 04:48:31
|
Huwr
Before the GML Portal was closed. Gato has speed up the site by reviewing the code. The access was very fast. Maybe you can ask Jag24 how it was with the resource usage. Jag24 was also running more sites on his computer with the GML Portal.
The GML Portal code was (is) a international version of a "snitz portal"< |
Edited by - cladon on 31 August 2005 07:43:12 |
 |
|
|
Shaggy
Support Moderator
Ireland
6780 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 05:24:46
|
If the international version is holding up the development of Snitz, maybe it could be put on the back burner for the time being while the next version is worked on?
< |
 Search is your friend
“I was having a mildly paranoid day, mostly due to the
fact that the mad priest lady from over the river had
taken to nailing weasels to my front door again.” |
|
|
|
ruirib
Snitz Forums Admin
Portugal
26364 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 07:07:09
|
One of the things that turned me into a Snitz user and forum participant for such a long time was the availability of an internationalized version, meaning v4.0Beta. I've been running a 4.0Beta3 for several years and never had an issue with it. Frankly speaking, the continuing postponement of a 4.0 release version is very frustrating and I guess the frustration can only be understood by the non-english speaking Snitz users.
How does the performance of 4.0 (let's call it) RC compare with the previous Beta versions? Is it that much heavier? How does it compare with non official internationalized versions people now use (like Image's version)? Is it heavier? Isn't there the possibility that we are being overzealous with the requirements for 4.0 regarding server load? If we aren't, what are the alternatives to follow? If maybe we are, why not release as still a beta and let the users have their say?
The feeling that is becoming pervasive that Snitz is at a standstill and may not get out of it is very disconforting. I'm sure many people would be willing to help improving this forum code, if only they had the chance to do it.< |
Snitz 3.4 Readme | Like the support? Support Snitz too |
Edited by - ruirib on 31 August 2005 07:08:16 |
|
|
|
MarcelG
Retired Support Moderator
Netherlands
2625 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 10:16:10
|
May I be so 'blunt' to ask why development cannot branch into two version being version 4.0 English and version 4.0 International ?
People who prefer pure speed and basic functionality over internationalization can use the first one, people who need multiple languages can choose the second.
... on the other hand ; I'm not sure - I'm no real programmer - but if you'd use one file with just the english languagepack which is loaded as application variables upon setup (and reboot) for the english language you wouldn't need to keep them very much different.
In fact, thinking outloud - you could even possibly make internationalization (e.g. giving the user the option to select the language) an option in the base version, so there will be only 1 versions, with a lot of languagepacks.
The way the languagepacks are used - either 1 pack as application variables, or numerous packs loaded on request of the user - defines the impact on serverload.
Just my 2 cents on internationalization, and please forgive my ignorance if my post doesnt make any sense.... < |
portfolio - linkshrinker - oxle - twitter |
Edited by - MarcelG on 31 August 2005 10:18:28 |
|
|
|
Nathan
Help Moderator
USA
7664 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 11:12:30
|
As I pointed out three years ago, it wouldn't be difficult to write a quick script that could make statically localized versions from a solution like snitz version 4.0. Pick whichever language pack you want at 'install' and all those strings are then written directly into the ASP files.
That solution would allow users who are willing to take the server hit to have more than one language, and it wouldn't degrade performance for people who only wanted one (which doesn't have to be english).< |
 Nathan Bales
CoreBoard | Active Users Download |
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 11:29:02
|
| Our basis for not making 2 versions is, we will need persons who will support the new version. The developers would be stretched thin to support both versions.< |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
MarcelG
Retired Support Moderator
Netherlands
2625 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 11:37:56
|
Davio, I understand what you mean, and realized that while writing my reply.
During my reply I also changed direction, and went towards the situation where the user-selectable internationalization became an option, instead of a mandatory feature.
A bit like Nathan describes, but instead of hardcoding it into the ASP files with a script, you could load the selected language as application variables.
As the total filesize of the entire code is less than 5 Mb, and most of it is code (so not content) it would take way less than 2 Mb of serverresources if I'm not mistaking. I don't know the filesize of a languagepack though.
Wouldn't that be an option ?< |
portfolio - linkshrinker - oxle - twitter |
|
|
|
Podge
Support Moderator
Ireland
3775 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 13:13:25
|
My opinion on internationalisation is that there are a number of ways to do it. Its just a matter of finding a way that satisfies these main requirements
- It supports all servers & platforms e.g. W2003, W2000, NT, SunOne, etc.
- Its user selectable from the profile page
- Its not a resource hog
A long time ago I converted V3.1 SR4 to css and found that performance increased mainly because the css was included as an externally linked sytlesheet which reduced the resources needed to run a forum (http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/css/style-html.html#external).
This method means that the client browser renders colours not the server (reducing server load) and it would also open up Snitz to css templates e.g. for each template you would create an xsl (xml stylesheet) file.
D3Mon is doing something similar here - http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/newforums/ (link is now broken)
You can see how templates would work here - http://www.csszengarden.com/
Maybe the way to go is to convert to css first and by doing so improve performance & rendering time for a forum. Then add in internationalisation.
My preferred method for internationalisation would be using xml & xsl files and using xslt to transform forum pages to the required language. This could also move processing to the client instead of the server (either way is possible). I'm not sure exactly how it would work yet but you can get an idea from this page - http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/XSLT/Recipe/65427
Either way, a lot of developers here seem to be eager & interested. Its the second time in a short period that "further development" has been brought up (see "Rant about mods"). Its just a matter of agreeing what needs to be done, who should do it and just go from there.< |
Podge.
The Hunger Site - Click to donate free food | My Blog | Snitz 3.4.05 AutoInstall (Beta!)
My Mods: CAPTCHA Mod | GateKeeper Mod
Tutorial: Enable subscriptions on your board
Warning: The post above or below may contain nuts. |
|
|
|
ajhvdb
Junior Member
Netherlands
392 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 14:09:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nathan
No they cant because someone here has decided to put a copyright on copyleft. As long as they start with Snitz as the basecode they are required to have the link back to this site HERE.
I agree...the copyright holders are holding back development. I can understand this but they must understand that it is time to let go. Some spin-offs will fail but if no new development is started in the coming year, the name "Snitz" will die. So please relax your copyright and create a new page with spin-off links. Wouldn't it be nice to see the the development of a Snitz.NET Forum or Snitz.CSS Forum started and you don't have to do anything.< |
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 15:15:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by ajhvdb
quote:
Originally posted by Nathan
No they cant because someone here has decided to put a copyright on copyleft. As long as they start with Snitz as the basecode they are required to have the link back to this site HERE.
I agree...the copyright holders are holding back development. I can understand this but they must understand that it is time to let go. Some spin-offs will fail but if no new development is started in the coming year, the name "Snitz" will die. So please relax your copyright and create a new page with spin-off links. Wouldn't it be nice to see the the development of a Snitz.NET Forum or Snitz.CSS Forum started and you don't have to do anything.
The use of the name Snitz has nothing whatsoever to do with copyright, Snitz is a registered trademark, registered to Mike it is up to him what he wishes to associate it with not us. If you want to write a .net forum go ahead it has nothing to do with this forum or it's name.< |
|
|
|
Nathan
Help Moderator
USA
7664 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 16:01:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by ajhvdb
I agree...the copyright holders are holding back development. I can understand this but they must understand that it is time to let go. Some spin-offs will fail but if no new development is started in the coming year, the name "Snitz" will die. So please relax your copyright and create a new page with spin-off links. Wouldn't it be nice to see the the development of a Snitz.NET Forum or Snitz.CSS Forum started and you don't have to do anything.
My point wasn't about the use of the snitz name ajhvdb, like Huw pointed out that is a registered trademark that belongs to Michael. My point was that the abuse of copyright combined with a copyleft licence will kill any spinoffs. It very much violates the spirit of Open Source and GPL. (Not that I'm really a big fan of the 'spirit of Open Source')< |
Nathan Bales
CoreBoard | Active Users Download |
|
|
|
AnonJr
Moderator
United States
5768 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 16:17:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Podge
Its just a matter of finding a way that satisfies these main requirements
- It supports all servers & platforms e.g. W2003, W2000, NT, SunOne, etc.
- Its user selectable from the profile page
- Its not a resource hog
If we want to meet these requirements, we'll probably have to stick with the "Classic ASP". We'd probably want to do that anyway as some hosting companies only offer .NET support on their middle and upper tier hosting packages - leaving those in the "cheap seats" out.
quote:
Originally posted by Podge
A long time ago I converted V3.1 SR4 to css and found that performance increased mainly because the css was included as an externally linked sytlesheet which reduced the resources needed to run a forum (http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/css/style-html.html#external).
While I can't vouch for increased client-side performance, I have noticed a big drop in bandwith usage when I moved to a CSS-Based version of Snitz. (it also let me play with the look and style a little more). This alone should be a good enough reason to at least 'upgrade' the offical current version to some sort of CSS solution.
I don't know enough about the intricacies of internationalization, so I'll refrain from commenting on that...
quote:
Originally posted by Podge
Either way, a lot of developers here seem to be eager & interested. Its the second time in a short period that "further development" has been brought up (see "Rant about mods"). Its just a matter of agreeing what needs to be done, who should do it and just go from there.
And here is what we need to resolve before we get too much further. What do we need to do, and who will do it? I think that using CSS, XML, and a class-based architecture we could create a version that could more easily be adapted to a lot of the things outside the above mentioned needs. (ie. a move to .NET would be fairly easy. If coded properly, only one or two minor changes and a new extension and 'ta da' you have a .NET forum.)
I guess this puts my tab up to 4c ...  < |
|
|
|
Nathan
Help Moderator
USA
7664 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 16:47:50
|
A class based archtecture in VB Script.
You might want to try starting by answering the meaning of life. It would be easier I think.< |
Nathan Bales
CoreBoard | Active Users Download |
|
|
|
-gary
Development Team Member
406 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 17:27:54
|
I don't see the point in moving the code base to .NET (cough, cough Community Server), an XML/XSLT approach (cough, cough ASP-DEv) or even PHP (cough, cough OH MY GOD THERE'S A LIST).
Snitz fills the "classic" ASP niche nicely and is so far behind in what's happening in forums today that no one would care about the ease of moving it to something like .NET anyway when there are much more advanced complete systems out there.
All Snitz needs is some integration of more common features and an understanding that this isn't 1998 anymore. Access and IIS 4 are history and trying to be compatible with every arcane Windows system in existence is something that should be left to version 3.
With the glacial development pace and IIS 7 just around the corner, version 4 may be the only chance at a final version of Snitz that will happily run for another 3-4 years. After that, it's best left to moth balls as the other forums based on more advanced languages will be quite mature by that point and finding a host to run .whatever or PHP 8 will be quite easy while finding legacy support for classic ASP will not.
Version 4 is a perfect time to focus on using the "advanced" features of ASP and SQL and realizing that servers today run more than 256MB of RAM. Leave the Access bound and FSO impaired with version 3.< |
KawiForums.com
 |
|
|
|
Reinsnitz
Snitz Forums Admin
USA
3545 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2005 : 18:50:27
|
Hello, and thank you Davio for pointing me to this thread... A lot has happened, and I wish I hadn't been forced to leave the community, but work, family and such have required it over the last few years... and I have missed you all very much...
I've been catching up on the thoughts of all of you, and it sounds like things have gotten very complicated...
Should we keep going?
If we do, what should we go in?
If we don't what should we do next?
What do the copyright holders have against us?
Well, whatever is decided, I am more than happy to support you all in whatever way I can. If it's a name thing, I'll gladly continue to allow the use of the Snitz name for the new product or the spinnoff or whatever. Huw and Richard are the guardians of the current code, and whatever happens with that must have their approval, but I would be a proponent of 4.0 being the final base release in ASP with a following full MOD release, and mabe looking at a conversion to .NET or a total re-write by this community if I had to say anything.
That leads to my last little statement here, which is that the purpose of the copyright that is written into the Snitz Forums product is there to encourage the community to stay together, and have a mutual respect for each other, and to help them focus on the product that they have all helped to build. The code that preceded Snitz did not, and did not. Snitz Forums is about all of you, not me or any other one individual, though some like Huw and Richard have given more than any of us could compare.
That all being said... whatever you decide to do... I will do what I can as a copyright holder of the name and code to help the community... weather it be to help transition to a new code base... or to reviatalize the existing project... if a case can be made to modify the license that I can buy into... I'll even consider that... But again... if it involves the base code... we need the buy in from Huw and Richard...
Any of you can feel free to contact me at any time, if I can't talk much, I'll let you know to expect delayed responses due to work.
AIM: reinsnitz
Yahoo: reinSnitz
ICQ: 408237
MSN: reinsnitz@hotmail.com
email: reinsnitz@gmail.com< |
Reinsnitz (Mike) |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Wish List For Snitz Forum
Topic Locked
