Discourse vs. Community Server
-
Chrome dev tools are reporting
border-top: 1px solid #f2f2f2;in.topic-bodyclass.
-
Mine's showing the override I put in:
Buggered if I know what's going on...
Off to the pub now. Hopefully it'll either have sorted itself by the time I get back on here, or someone else'll have fixed it....
-
It looks like we're getting different css files. I get this (and it looks like @mikeTheLiar does too):
@PJH, you're getting a totally different file. Maybe it just takes a while for the server cache to refresh?
-
@PJH, did you remember to enable it instead of just previewing it?
-
Yup Ben, it's definately enabled.
-
The only custom CSS I see is this:
.d-header #site-logo { max-width: 280px !important; }
-
Server-side cache issue perhaps? I couldn't see any UI to flush it...
@sam, any insight please?
-
I would wait, the extremely light bar between posts was actually a bug related to us normalizing on a standard set of colors in the new EZ themer. So that wasn't anything you guys set, it was our fault.
Let me deploy the latest now and see if it helps. edit: yes, definitely darker default lines between posts now. Better? I agree it was crazily light before.
-
Better?
A little. Depending on my viewing angle, I can at least see there is a line. It's not very distinct, but it's there.
-
My eyes were already kind of adjusting to different visual hooks on the page to descry posts, but a more blocky recoloring is still needed, I think.
-
Yeah, it's fine to override with CSS as well. Unfortunately that line between posts is set on 3 different
<div>s which is annoying.
-
-
Try hard refresh.
-
This ain't my first rodeo. I cleared the cache before I posted originally.
Fine, I'll humor you....
Well, shit. I guess it worked that time for some reason. We're up to #e6e6e6;
-
would wait, the extremely light bar between posts was actually a bug related to us normalizing on a standard set of colors in the new EZ themer. So that wasn't anything you guys set, it was our fault.
Let me deploy the latest now and see if it helps. edit: yes, definitely darker default lines between posts now. Better? I agree it was crazily light before.
Why are color settings ever anything other than a per-user preference?
(The only legitimate reasons I can think of for non-changeable colors/fonts is something like a game where you want everyone to have the same constraints or if you are doing read-only media for brand recognition.)
Edit: stupid "can't edit just whitespace" message...
-
@too_many_userna said:
Why are color settings ever anything other than a per-user preference?
You never complain about this on other forums, but now we're on Discourse and suddenly it's an affront to your personal sovereignty?Don't be silly. Skins are hard to implement for very little payoff. It would be like writing your own scrolling widget!
-
You never complain about this on other forums, but now we're on Discourse and suddenly it's an affront to your personal sovereignty?
I wasn't complaining, just asking what thought process makes people think their choices for colors should be hard-coded in their products. Especially with things like CSS that make it very easy to assign symbolic names to things like that (and, in fact, they already have names....). So why not just make them user-editable and stored in the database?
As a lazy developer, if there's ever a way I can make my life easy by allowing a user to configure something themselves so they don't have to keep coming back to bug me to change the code to do it, I make that thing configurable.
Also - I don't understand what color palettes have to do with skins - they are different beasts. (And I happen to agree that skins are much more difficult).
-
@too_many_userna said:
ust asking what thought process makes people think their choices for colors should be hard-coded in their products. Especially with things like CSS that make it very easy to assign symbolic names to things like that (and, in fact, they already have names....). So why not just make them user-editable and stored in the database?
The line between posts isn't hard-coded, it's a blend offset from the primary text color. Problem was, it was the wrong blend offset.
-
it was the wrong blend offset.
I get that sometimes. Kitchen's still a right mess.
ALT JOKE:
I couldn't sell that junk on the streets anymore, had to burn it.
-
The line between posts isn't hard-coded, it's a blend offset from the primary text color. Problem was, it was the wrong blend offset.
The blend offset sounds like it was hard-coded. General rule of thumb I use in software development: if a configuration item requires a recompile/redeploy, you're making extra work for yourself, so make it a user-configurable one and save yourself the headache. I'm lazy like that.
-
@too_many_userna said:
I wasn't complaining, just asking what thought process makes people think their choices for colors should be hard-coded in their products. Especially with things like CSS that make it very easy to assign symbolic names to things like that (and, in fact, they already have names....). So why not just make them user-editable and stored in the database?
As a lazy developer, if there's ever a way I can make my life easy by allowing a user to configure something themselves so they don't have to keep coming back to bug me to change the code to do it, I make that thing configurable.
Also - I don't understand what color palettes have to do with skins - they are different beasts. (And I happen to agree that skins are much more difficult).
I feel like maybe you don't understand CSS very well. What you're suggesting would actually be kind of a PITA. A bit easier with CSS3 variables, but those are brand new.
Otherwise, you're going to have a lot of CSS just puked out inline on every page. (Or done through JS, but even more room for trouble there..) And that CSS would have to be pulled from a DB or cache on every page request. And cacheability of CSS takes a hit.
CSS wasn't meant as a way to make the whole page configurable per-user. It was meant to make presentation and markup separable (although it's only been somewhat successful there.)
If you really want custom CSS, that's what user stylesheets are for.
-
Otherwise, you're going to have a lot of CSS just puked out inline on every page. (Or done through JS, but even more room for trouble there..) And that CSS would have to be pulled from a DB or cache on every page request. And cacheability of CSS takes a hit.
I've done it effectively, but it wasn't easy. SCSS is entered into our CMS, which compiles it, blesses it, timestamps and generates source maps, and a MD5 key for caching. There's a script that serves the compiled markup, and it honors the ETag and If-Modified-Since headers, and supports deflate, and gzip.
-
Better?
I pushed Ctrl+Shift+R and now quote backgrounds are really dark, but at least the post separators are visible.
-
I've done it effectively, but it wasn't easy. SCSS is entered into our CMS, which compiles it, blesses it, timestamps and generates source maps, and a MD5 key for caching. There's a script that serves the compiled markup, and it honors the ETag and If-Modified-Since headers, and supports deflate, and gzip.
Yeah, but are you doing that for each user? Or are you just dynamically-generating it for the whole site/sub-site?
-
Yeah, but are you doing that for each user? Or are you just dynamically-generating it for the whole site/sub-site?
It's not exposed to the end-user, but we manage stylesheets for about 50 websites in that interface. The cache for thousands of end users would run the web server out of memory most likely, but at that point I'd probably serialize to disk and serve up regular files, or push to our CDN.
-
It's not exposed to the end-user, but we manage stylesheets for about 50 websites in that interface. The cache for thousands of end users would run the web server out of memory most likely, but at that point I'd probably serialize to disk and serve up regular files, or push to our CDN.
Yeah, but it would also be a PITA to implement for end-users. I mean, there's no reason to clutter up the CDN with a stylesheet for one, single fucker.
My point is just: how many sites give users the ability to save individual CSS tweaks to the database? I've never even heard of that.
-
I would wait,
So there's no way of pushing a CSS change out from the web interface other than simply 'waiting'?
-
There is, CSS changes should be fine via the /admin customize area. The specific case of the bar between posts being too dim was what I meant to wait on, but that fix was already deployed a while ago.
-
So, what did I do wrong/not do when changing the CSS at /admin/customize/css_html when I could see the changes but no-one else could?
already deployed a while ago.
The version number is still at 0.9.9.4 - are you making changes and not changing the version number?
-
Ninja edits are the best edits.
-
Google and Mozilla have already used up all the version numbers, there aren't enough left for the little guy!
-
The version number is still at 0.9.9.4 - are you making changes and not changing the version number?
If they changed the version number every time they committed a fix, they'd be at version WebBrowser by now.
Here's how you update:
Step 1:
Step 2:
-
How do you get to that page to do the updates?
-
The page is linked to from an automated email whenever the version number changes.
-
It's here for your install.
The page is linked to from an automated email whenever the version number changes.
You are missing the port number in your URL. The admin site is running on a different port number.
-
Google and Mozilla have already used up all the version numbers, there aren't enough left for the little guy!
#OccupyVersion99
-
You are missing the port number in your URL. The admin site is running on a different port number.
You're an admin now?
-
-
You're an admin now?
He's the shadowy, evil mastermind behind the whole Discourse switch.
-
One of Alex's sock puppets.
@moderator said:He's the shadowy, evil mastermind behind the whole Discourse switch.
I could buy that. Imagine: Alex, unknown to us, suffers from multiple personality disorder. One of those personalities happens to Nagesh, who has secretly brainwashed Alex's primary personality into switching the forums to Discourse.
On second thought, I don't think it works.
You know, I've been thinking (before any of you say it, I know that's a dangerous thing to do). With the way this transition has been going, why isn't it called Discord?
-
-
I still favour making our own fork called "Intercourse".
You'd probably be happy if was called Intracourse.
-
He's the shadowy, evil mastermind behind the whole Discourse switch.
gasp! The Shadow Mod!
-
-
Thanks, actually, that's pretty cool.
Updating CS took half a day. Fortunately, they only updated every couple months, and then in 2007, the realized they had reached perfection and thus stopped updating.
-
With discourse we are on bleeding age of technology. Just keep this in mind, when you sign in. Anytime you go on the bleeding age, it is bound to cause some hick-ups.
-
are on bleeding age of
On the bleeding edge.
cause some hick-ups.
Cause some hiccups.
-
I still favour making our own fork called "Intercourse".
This curse.
-
-
Right. I want that to sink into everybody's head: the problem isn't that this forum is different, the problem is that it's broken.
Worse than Community Server?
Wait, never mind. As I typed this post, I see what you mean. FUCK this.
