Forum Replies Created
-
Scratch that.
What @bphelp said. Somehow I had missed the messages after the first two.
@struth Have you, as admin, added some of the users? I ask because the default sorting on the lists is by “last active”. If a member never logged in (such as a member created by admin) then (s)he would not show up in the list by default. Change the sorting to Alphabetical and see if your users show up.
@callumoberholzer BuddyPress profiles have been getting more and more robust.
Member search is something BuddyPress is not very good at though. Plugins such as BP Profile Search offer a partial solution. So if you feel search function is too limited, do feel free to contribute code to make BuddyPress better. Any help is always welcome.
danbp:
The in #4539 related Mediapress is a great feature (still in beta, but promise full).
I installed it yesterday for intense test. 😉
Do share the results of your tests.
hnla:
It’s that time again isn’t it @sooskriszta for your wish list
Exactement, Hastings.
hnla:
I would leave out the @mentions on individuals they can be irritating.
Agree 100%. Honest mistake. Didn’t intend to @mention. Just force of habit.
hnla:
As you have created tickets for all your wish list items I’m sure they’ll receive consideration so perhaps these forum posts are unnecessary?
I’m sure they will. But:
1. I have lots of tickets, I wanted to have a look at my priorities
2. My wishlist often includes others’ tickets as well.
3. This topic isn’t just about me. I also want to hear about other’s top wishes, and I want core team to hear them as well.
4. C’mon, this is a fun “tradition”djpaul:
Not sure where you got Christmas from
From that old liar, the trac roadmap https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/roadmap
I also recall something to that effect being mentioned in a devchat. Though I also recall scope finalization date being set to end of WCSF…@henrywright
Unfortunately no updates. The wireframes have been done for a while, but I don’t believe a decision has been taken.
@ciromanigrasso
Please visit and chime in at
https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/4132 and https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/5583if this part of the core functionality (and the chat as well), then so much the better.
I agree. And if you do feel that way, you should go say so at the Trac ticket https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/4126
2. Profile header to show more info of use at a glance (much like what is shown on buddypress homepage that showcases James Jacoby’s profile header)
Check out and chime in: https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/4126
Doesn’t 2.0 have the functionality you need?
https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/5374Doh!
I would prefer a field-by-field switch a la https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/787 as opposed to a blanked on/off.
@djpaul Thanks! That would be nice https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/787
Thanks Henry
This is really something for s2s to address.
You can check this at http://csillamvilag.com/modellek/hely/magyarorszag/members/
Hmm…for some reason, looks like my reply was not posted.
I tried the code. But for some reason it seems that instead of being executed, the code appears as text on the site 🙁
Thanks, @shanebp
Will try and report back.
I’ll revise my top 5 to:
Wow… that’s a lot of work (changing every mention of the word “group” in the po file one by one)! Even with that poedit program, it was a tedious and time consuming task because there was no “find and replace” functionality and with a text editor (I use TextPad), you have to be sure not to rename any file names. There needs to be s a simpler way.
Wait till you realize that all your .po file changes will be lost the moment you update Buddypress.
Ok, looks like the iron’s hot https://buddypress.trac.wordpress.org/query?group=status&milestone=2.1 , so while the core team is enjoying a pizza and relishing a job well done (2.0), sneak in your wishlist…this appears to be a short cycle…
@johnjamesjacoby Rocking photo. Love it!
What are your top 5 feature requests for 2.0?
@sooskriszta – do you mean 2.1?
@henrywright Yup! Damn you, autocorrect.@xr4v3nx Yeah the dropdown js while cool doesn’t quite cut it.
Shall we start a pool? I would be happy to pay a small fee to help the developer get started on this.
@im4th Honestly, I don’t see why BP Media should be involved since:
1. They are not even close to being the top media plugin for BP. rtMedia is (source http://mercime.github.io/buddyPress-2014-survey-results/index.html)
2. By their own admission, they have taken so many manhours to build simple functionality that it seems their approach is almost prohibitive for BP core team.I think we should look to work more closely with rtMedia, who have built in a very short period of time a much more feature-rich and popular option than BP Media.
Also, I strongly feel we should leverage the media management capability that is already built into WordPress.
@henrywright i agree with you on that definitely, but adding some functionality that some plugins offer as built into buddypress would also help because your adding less weight from these plugins too no?
@mcpeanut I am probably the person that asks most often for stuff to be included in the core. However I beg to differ with you on this as a general principle.I think you are right – if everything I need is in the core then the install will probably be faster than having a barebones core and 500 different plugins that I need to achieve the functionality I need. With you on that.
Problem is: everyone’s “needs” may be different. That’s why WordPress and BuddyPress are extensible systems. If there are 500 features in the core and I need only 50 and the core is slower because of that, then I would be one of the people complaining about “bloat”.
So, it’s essentially akin to drawing a line in the sand and hoping you get to the goldilocks area: a core that’s not so bare as to not be useful and not so bloated as to be inflexible or noticeably slow.
I think there are 3 (relatively) objective tests that the developers can employ when considering whether to include a feature in the core:
- Will the feature be useful for (or used by) a sizable majority (60%+) of users
e.g. media management capability - Will the feature be used by only a significant minority (5%+) but is mission-critical for those who use it
Mission-critical is defined as a feature without which the whole premise of the site of community (that uses the feature) will fall apart. e.g. activity widgets, facebook likebox, Genesis connect etc are not mission-critical but multisite, multilingual and hierarchical groups are - Do we need the feature for strategic reasons
i.e. for marketing, competitive or usability reasons, e.g. new user activation workflow revamp
-
Passing any one test should put the feature on the roadmap. If multiple tests are passed, it should be a priority.
- Will the feature be useful for (or used by) a sizable majority (60%+) of users
