BuddyPress.org

How should I go about adding this function to my child theme (Fishbook).

BuddyPress Private Community is in the Fail list here https://codex.buddypress.org/releases/1-5-plugin-compatibility/, however the error listed in this table seems to be for another plugin.

When I install Private Community, it does create a php error, but I found this error is not created by the plugin, but by a BuddyPress bug described here: https://wordpress.org/support/topic/plugin-buddypress-private-community-when-clicking-on-a-protected-page-i-get-error.

I have made the fixes described for this bug, and Private Community now seems to be working, although I am still testing.

Hmm first up a little more information about your set up would be good.

Are you running single or multisite WordPress?
Are you on the latest WordPress?
Have you checked the minimal server requirements for WordPress and that your server meets these?
Do you have a memory limit in your php.ini file (you may have to ask your host about this)?
Have you tried deactivating all other plugins then just trying BuddyPress with the default theme?

No need to link to your admin panel – make sure you don’t put private information also (just incase) on this forum as it’s a public forum.

Sure, if i understand correctly you only want logged in users to see certain pages.

Private-buddypress should do the job:
https://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/private-buddypress/

Hope that helps.

Very strange. Is *any* of the javascript on your BP 1.5 installation working? Places to check: requesting friendships/group memberships from directories; replying to private messages; the “read more” link that appears when you have a very long forum post.

@hectorrubio my thanks as well. Definitely a good read – the planning process to implementation using native WP functions and BP/plugins. Cheers.

Thank you for taking the time to put this together. Much appreciated.

Hhhhm @tnd, not sure what your goal is. Based on my interpretation of what your trying to accomplish, I would do this instead. Create a Smith Family group, and add Smith family members to the Group. You could set permissions on it to “hidden”: that is, the admin gives permission to those who want to join AND the group is listed in the group directory; or, “private”, where the previous applies except, no one sees it (not listed in the group directory, but only seen by Smith group members as part of their profile).

That way, in XProfile, you could be specific about defining the role (through a field group), that a Smith Family group member would choose to complete, and that info is what would be displayed when Public is selected.

The “name” issue that you mentioned… if by filling out “Name”, you’re referring to the “Name” in the “Base”, then every time that’s changed, that logged in member’s profile name will change. If you actually added a field called “name” to a field group and when editing the profile, specifically, that field group’s field called “name” and by doing so, somehow changes the “Base” field “name” content, then I have no idea how to help. That shouldn’t happen.

Hey @christophg

Sorry, I’ve been travelling a lot or work and haven’t had enough time to come back here!! Thanks for the info on Profile manager. I was half way through with my solution when I stumbled upon hers. It didn’t work for me, so I contacted her. After several iterations of the plugin it still didn’t work for me. I suspect there may be a plugin conflict, however, I have limited plugins running on my installation, and my community needs every one of them. So I continued to make refine the idea I sent to you.

As for your question regarding using S2 to control who gets one of your pages created, I am not sure if it is possible. As it stands, S2’s hooks and filters only allow you to keep content sequestered depending on user level.

One idea for you though is to allow a page to be created for every one who registers. Then, display the contents of that page as an iFrame on each users member profile page. Create a private group for the members who should have a rating. Then wrap the iframe in code that restricts the display of the iframe to only displayed members of that group. I do this very thing for my “Brands”.

I believe this is the code I used to show only on my brands member pages:

https://buddypress.org/community/groups/creating-extending/forum/topic/checking-if-a-user-is-in-a-group

Let me know if you need more help!

Imma gonna blame those dots

@simon_said – Would you mind posting a bug ticket on trac.buddypress.org, with steps to reproduce? Thanks!

Also, what exactly are these three users’ user names?

Just to be clear – by “autocomplete” you mean that, when you click the Private Message button, the user’s name is already filled in as a little box on the Compose screen, right?

If you’re meaning the private messaging; then, no. That’s internal only.

Yes and no. I’m doing something similar by configuring/hacking buddypress within my own theme. I used the BuddyPress Template Pack plugin to get the pages I needed but it’s a lot of editing from there. And I think that the S2Membership plugin will further the control by you if you want to make certain parts of the site public and other parts private.

I think BuddyPress is designed to take over a site, not sit side by side. Although that is what I’m trying to do.

I’m fairly proficient at hacking WordPress and I’m still running into roadblocks with configuring BuddyPress.

My philosophy is everyone starts knowing nothing we all know varying things and should share to help each other. Whilst a lot of what I think you want to know would be helped if you can by installing BuddyPress on a a site somewhere and exploring or trying the test site (http://testbp.org/). Let me see if I can help a little.

Traditional forums would be what bbpress (https://bbpress.org/) would be your solution for. Now, in saying that BuddyPress uses bbpress for forums. So it’s a mutual use in sense of BuddyPress.

The way groups work are yes by having forums. The way I like to think of them are hang outs / clubhouses where there is a link between members and they can discuss. I may have an interest in dogs (the main site) but I may only want to talk about dog training or labradors (those would be groups). That’s a bit of a broad explanation but hopefully gets the notion across.

Now can you have traditional forums – yes with bbpress but groups is a more segemented talking.

Others may have their own breakdowns of it but to me this is what groups and forums are in simple terms.

Some more links to share with you though that may help it make a bit more sense:

https://buddypress.org/about/story/

And here is from the buddypress.org home page about groups:

“Powerful public, private or hidden groups allow your users to break the discussion down into specific topics. Extend groups with your own custom features using the group extension API.”

And about forums:

“Full powered discussion forums built directly into groups allow for more conventional in-depth conversations.”

It’s a flaw in BP it will be fixed sometime in the future. I have a trac ticket up.

@Webbasica I accomplished that by using the MultiSite feature… each “fanpage” is a blog. When I started my community I studied Facebook Fan pages and concluded that they should not be able to send private messages to their fans, nor tag members on pictures nor make mentions ( @username). Therefore I opted for using “blogs” as fanpages, any business or brand or institution can create a blog and post things, entries, pictures, etc. They can have a king of profile, an about pre-set page and their activity wall is a page with almost no content and all comments! This works also grate if you’re using oEmbed plugin which allows you to paste youtube videos urls and it will be the same than embedding them… so I just think they’re perfect. Let me know if I can help you further… regards

@larrysmith1000, @Arwym, @FitzUCF, @janismo, @hnla
I don’t know if anyone is still looking at this, but I think it is a topic that is worth pursuing. What seems to be getting lost though is what it takes to do the job.

A facility like Justin Tadlock’s members plugin is a big help. It provides a mechanism to define and edit roles and apply them to users. That covers a lot of territory. However, unless the content management part of the software looks for and enforces those roles, it is meaningless. Justin provides a facility to do that if what you are talking about posts/pages and potentially custom post types. That is fine for WP content or even things like BuddyPress Docs where Boone implemented it as a custom content type (although I haven’t look at the details of his implementation relative to permissions). However, BP adds additional content types. And it is not just FORUMS. Groups are a content type. Private messaging is a content type. etc.

That is where the current_user_can() checks make sense. Users should have permission to perform actions. That doesn’t necessarily mean new roles, but it does mean distinct capabilities. Those capabilities can then be assigned to any role that makes sense. But the capability list needs to be published like it is for WP https://codex.wordpress.org/Roles_and_Capabilities

The mechanism for assigning capabilities to roles and roles to users and doing the actual check is all WP. It’s already there. Justin provides UI to access it. What I am seeing missing in BP is published string literals that have meaning in terms of capability sets and I assume the current_user_can() checks that actually make it happen. (I looked for it on Google and this is where I was directed!)

@DJPaul you talked here in terms of BP1.3, which is now 1.5 I believe. Did any of this actually make it into the code? If not, it sure would make sense to me to find it’s way on to a revised RoadMap.

My 2 cents!