The forums' buggy rich text editor

petmakris
Offline
Junior Member

21 May 2023 16:01 #271841 by petmakris

The forums' buggy rich text editor was created by petmakris

Is there anything we can do for the forums' editor? Maybe some updating to latest version if there any?

It is very buggy when trting to edit an existing message.

The following user(s) said Thank You: JPL

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

PCW
Away
Moderator

21 May 2023 16:59 #271852 by PCW

Replied by PCW on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

It's horrible, makes me want to punish whoever wrote it...

The following user(s) said Thank You: JPL

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

JPL
Offline
Platinum Member

21 May 2023 19:00 #271868 by JPL

Replied by JPL on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

PCW wrote:
It's horrible, makes me want to punish whoever wrote it...

The following user(s) said Thank You: Clive S

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

JT
Away
Administrator

25 May 2023 10:53 #272144 by JT

Replied by JT on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

I've not found a way but if you do let me know.

JT

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

smc.collins
Offline
Platinum Member

25 May 2023 14:52 #272151 by smc.collins

Replied by smc.collins on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

I'd pitch in a few $$$ to get a better forum software system , there's a ton out there, disquos, vbulletin etc.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

tommylight
Away
Moderator

25 May 2023 18:44 #272163 by tommylight

Replied by tommylight on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

I would never pay for such things, especially since almost all are proprietary closed source stuff.
Open source with support i would pay gladly.
I do donate occasionally to some open source stuff/foundations/organisations.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

smc.collins
Offline
Platinum Member

26 May 2023 20:52 #272229 by smc.collins

Replied by smc.collins on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

i am always willing to spend $ if it means saving my time.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

JT
Away
Administrator

28 May 2023 14:08 #272339 by JT

Replied by JT on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

Unfortunately migrating to new software would loose all the history... unless you know of an open source forum software that can import all the history?

JT

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

smc.collins
Offline
Platinum Member

31 May 2023 13:12 #272560 by smc.collins

Replied by smc.collins on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

why does it have to be open source ?? it's nice when it is, but that shouldn't be the overarching choice as to which software to use. that's ideological thinking, it should be, features, efficiency, function, cost.

i think a phpbb would probably be better though, than what is here, and i think they have numerous import export plugins, yes the look is more antiquated, but the functionality is vastly superior and massive open source support community.

The following user(s) said Thank You: rodw

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Aciera
Offline
Administrator

31 May 2023 13:34 #272562 by Aciera

Replied by Aciera on topic The forums' buggy rich text editor

Personally I prefer the threaded forum style we have (even with the buggy editor) to the flat message structure of phpbb. There are people who prefer the chat format but I certainly do not.

it should be, features, efficiency, function, cost.

It should also be about not having your data exploited and sold and being able to verify what the software actually does in the background which is after all what linuxcnc is partly about. Seems kind of sad to throw all that out of the window just because the forum editor is buggy.

The following user(s) said Thank You: tommylight, JT

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.234 seconds