IPS Management
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Matt

  • Rank
    Chief Software Architect

Contact Methods

IPS Marketplace

  • Resources Contributor
    Total file submissions: 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Cambs, UK!
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

218,343 profile views
  1. "Sunset" I think we decided?
  2. Actually, it's a whole new system to highlight specific groups' posts and comments which is configurable per theme via the theme settings.
  3. As IPS 4.1 matures, we'll be switching gears to devoting more time in the bug tracker. One must keep in mind that we make dozens of bug fixes and changes a day based on tickets sent to us, so please don't think that we're neglecting the software.
  4. Yep, @Mark Hhas a very busy 3.x forum that he upgrades as part of the QA procedure.
  5. I would do this: 1) Submit a bug report. Note it is a dev site. 2) If the developer working the report wants a ticket, submit a ticket quoting the bug report ID in the title of the ticket and re-iterate in the body of the support request that developer Z (Andy, Matt, etc) requested you submit a ticket. 3) Reply to the bug report saying that you've submitted a ticket and add the ticket number.
  6. I'm going to go ahead and lock this. RPG, we often butt heads in the bug tracker, and I don't think arguing semantics is really helping anyone. Feel free to contact me via a support ticket or PM if you want to talk or push for a code change because of feedback you wish to give.
  7. The best solution I can think of right now is that if you encounter a bug on a dev copy of your site, go and file that bug report and note it's a dev install. A developer will triage the report and if it requires more investigation, they'll ask for a ticket for access to that dev installation (assuming access is possible, otherwise this whole discussion is moot). We've done this a lot in the past. I consider a bug report different from a support request. We appreciate people taking the time to test and report issues, so we'll happily look at your dev installs if it fixes an issue we can't reproduce and has great impact on the suite.
  8. I have thought about beta releases again, but that wasn't always a perfect system in the past. That said, I think the QA needs for a release than has 10 bug fixes and no feature changes is different from a release that has 400 bug fixes and a dozen new things. I think that's what we need to focus on moving forwards.
  9. Hi all, Thanks for all your feedback. We're painfully aware of when things go wrong. It doesn't go unnoticed internally. We're made a lot of progress in the past year with the aim of making releases more stable and the upgrades smoother. We've implemented dedicated QA testing and "auto" upgrades to make the upgrades simpler to apply. 4.1.12 was a huge release with over 400 bug fixes. Unfortunately several issues escaped us and we had to push out a release to resolve those issues. The failure rate was about 0.5% - it's just that 0.5% affected a lot of people. We're having a discussion internally about how to improve; including revamping QA and introducing automated testing and so on. It's always a balance finding time and talent to do those things when the code base is constantly shifting to accommodate performance improvements, feature additions and bug fixes. But we always learn and strive to improve. I'd love to hear your thoughts on how to improve the process (please make them realistic though! We'd love to employ 20 QA testers on a permanent basis but it would mean a hike in license costs to do that ).
  10. is not showing under available downloads?


    This is a maintenance release to resolve the following issues: Permission matrix can show incorrect permissions when using the Member > Group permission tool. Using Authorize.Net Payment Gateway may result in an error. A logged in member without a valid timezone set will trigger exceptions any time another members age is checked. Where the upgrader can result in a fatal error due to an invalid class stored for a Pages record comment. An upgrade error where reports are loaded for Pages databases that no longer exist. Orphaned comments trigger an exception when search index is rebuilding. An exception can occur continued upgrades: DateTime::setTimestamp() expects parameter 1 to be long, object given. Recursion can occur if the core_log table doesn't exist yet (as happens during auto upgrade). An issue where importing a theme can break CSS. MySQL strict mode upgrade to 4.1.12 can fail. Installing a new plugin via the ACP can fail. As part of our ongoing internal security audit, this release also improves security in the following areas: Possible XSS in the "hovercard" system. Further hardening to the insecure file upload code.
  12. This will be in 4.12.
  13. If you have an issue that is impacting your community, you are very welcome to open a support ticket.
  14. Please keep reporting bugs, but an issue that only affects outside validation isn't a priority for us. The 
 thing has been mentioned a few times and it's caused by several things that aren't "easy" to fix. So we're simply saying that to fix an issue that doesn't actually affect anything will take considerable development resources. Resources we can't really afford to spare at this time.
  15. It's also worth mentioning that IPS4 has tools to allow you to rename the admin directory and to add .htaccess authentication to the admin directory if you are concerned with password stealing and so on.