This thread discusses the Content article: Fireboard Forum 1.0.1

I do not agree at all with some of the comments. The code is awfull, (why classes and code *in the templates* ?) there is still a lot of html errors, miss a lot of css class and the css file, oh, my God, just have a look at it !
I had to spend hours to patch the code (but less than with my old hacked joomlaboard) in order to get-it bug free and look more or less as i want.
And still have to work more to get-it w3c compliant.
Ok, ok, it is in beta. But gold ? Not yet.

Yes, but IMHO it's BY FAR the best forum component for Joomla. A bridge is out of the question in my mind, because the detriments it brings FAR outweigh the possible benifits. That pretty much leaves either Joomlaboard or Fireboard.

I absolutly agree. That's why i had spended so much time to hack Joomlaboard.
On my point of view, Fireboard is worse than Joomlaboard on a lot of points, and it is sad.
i was thinking to refactorize the code from 0, but, what a work !
The only real progress i can see in joomlaboard is it don't use globals, but it takes 10mn to do it on joomlaboard (10 vars or so), i had done it myself on my board.
(btw: Your page cache is perfectly written

Why thank you. I really appreciate it (I have a few hundred hours into the coding of pagecache 2.0)... Some things about Fireboard do bother me, and I have been contemplating writing a forum component myself for Joomla (just because a lot of what I want is not included). It's just that it's a lot of time to write a forum... Maybe if I got a few developers who wanted to join in...

As you says, it is a lot of work to write a forum from scratch.
What i can propose, is to send-you my joomlaboard if you like to have a look.
(it was for my own use, lot of commented lines) If i'm not alone, i can begin to clean slowly (lot of work) the code. Reorganize the structure in an understandable way (one page -> one file, all functions in an include folder, only one DB call by page, a clean switch "case" in the main page, etc...)
What do you think ?
I do not want to join the fireboard team because i do not agree the way they so things, like mixing template and code, adding java gadjets and images before debugging the core, etc...)

(btw: you have a little html warning in components/page_cache.class.php, line 117:
alt="..." has to be removed, it is a link, not an image

Post edited by: esperado, at: 2007/09/04 09:28

Well, my thoughts behind what a GOOD forum should do are the following...
1) Use everything Joomla has to offer for the front end. Basically, why bother having your own sessions when Joomla does it for you (I hate the fireboard refresh)...
2) Object Orient the code with prototypes and the such
3) Have an internal user group manager (so you can define custom groups)
4) Have multiple levels of mods and admins... "single forum mods, global mods, JR admins, admins"...

Once PageCache 2.0 goes to RC1 (should be the end of this week), I think I will start to work on a forums component...

Agree with all (i had edited my last message, have a look to the last add
And: a real "templates" system: forum can use joomla's classes by default, of course, (they are never appropriate), but every tags need to have alternate classes (suffix). And a forum has to give to the user the choice in admin to be full sized (in the joomla template with the choice with/without left menu . (pathway is anough to return to main joomla page).
(apologize for my poor English.)
Also, all the things witch can be done with javascript (and i hate to write java stuff) has to be done that way for speed on a user point of view.
Specialy, i would like to have a single page for a forum, and on each discussion (a click on the subject expand the thread) (and a click on a new one collapse the previous one). This can be done asynchronous (thanks to Ajax).
And my last idea is to can use DB or NNTP group for the content: this tool would be universal.
(have a look to the slow http://esperado.dyndns.tv/fr/forum there is some ideas i like)

the only thing I don't like is the number of clicks needed...

Oh, and ALT issue fixed in SVN...

Post edited by: ircmaxell, at: 2007/09/04 10:06

ircmaxell wrote:
the only thing I don't like is the number of clicks needed...

(you need to use the "retour (=return)" button
In fact, if it's instant, the threathed view is the best way to can follow a conversation. Do you know Xnews for Newsgroups ?
I'm making my first steps with ajax to speed-up this nntp web forum (i'm so slow too) and will finish in some months
Oh, you can have a look too my two forums, the joomlaboard:
http://www.esperado.dyndns.tv/fr/forumdusite.html
the Fireboard:
http://www.slideup.eu/Forum/
and a webmail i'm workin on too:
http://www.esperado.dyndns.tv/fr/mailtest/

Too much work for a single man
(When you begin to think about a forum-component for Joomla; if i can help let-me know. Some told me i'm not the worse with ergonomy for user interface)

Oh, i do not know what happens with your fireboard, but, here it looks like it refresh 10 times on each page.

Post edited by: esperado, at: 2007/09/04 10:33

Post edited by: esperado, at: 2007/09/04 10:33

ircmaxell wrote:
Well, my thoughts behind what a GOOD forum should do are the following...
1) Use everything Joomla has to offer for the front end. Basically, why bother having your own sessions when Joomla does it for you (I hate the fireboard refresh)...
2) Object Orient the code with prototypes and the such
3) Have an internal user group manager (so you can define custom groups)
4) Have multiple levels of mods and admins... "single forum mods, global mods, JR admins, admins"...

Once PageCache 2.0 goes to RC1 (should be the end of this week), I think I will start to work on a forums component...

Why dont you use phpBB? with CB connector or if you are going to use Joomla 1.5 and phpBB 3.0 Olympus ?

Because bridges are a REALLY bad idea. They only screw things up. I ran a phpBB bridge for about 8 months on another site, and it was just a PITA... You can't use either Joomla or phpBB to eithers full potential. Not to mention the performance penalty.