What's so bad about discourse?
-
@loopback0 said:
Even if you are running their Docker image, but not
on Digital OceanHosted by them on their specially blessed platform, you can fuck off and they will not help you.FTFY
Nah, you get some support if you're installing it on Ubuntu on Digital Ocean, but not if you're running Ubuntu on, say, Azure. Because Jeff.
-
<something something referral codes?
-
Nah, you get some support if you're installing it on Ubuntu on Digital Ocean
Only because it would be really hard for them to find a reason why they wouldn't support the configuration they themselves are running on.
-
Incognito windows aren't supported?
If you aren't trampling all over their session, clearing their unread posts and notifications and logging them out when you're done, you're .
That's how they made impersonation work and didn't change it when it was pointed out, so that must be how it was intended to work, right?
-
IIRC it doesn't log the user you impersonate out, just the admin.
It's intended to be "disruptive" to the admin.As I'm still logged in at work and on mobile, the log out probably wasn't caused by Discourse so I'm assuming it was some local thing on my laptop at home.
-
trampling all over their session, clearing their unread posts and notifications
Hmm. Always one or two things I forget...
-
it doesn't log the user you impersonate out
I might be remembering wrong then, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did log the impersonated user out as well at one point (or will sometime in the future).
-
IIRC it doesn't log the user you impersonate out, just the admin.
No, it logs the user out of all sessions. At that point, the admin isn't logged in on that session, they are the user (as if they'd gone though the login page. )
-
-
Or it used to. Think it was me who turned it off after discussion in the thread about it:
-
discussion in the thread about it:
-
-
Sorry Not Sorry, an error has occurred
-
Almost, except Torvalds is actually competent.
Hello, Git user here.
No. No he is not.
-
What'd u expect when you have the thing polling for updates with every logged in client. It's a cool feature, but comes at a cost.
100 users polling constantly does not compare to 1000s of users clicking next to view the next 10 posts?
Sometimes, it's so bad, I could have read all the posts on the next page by the time Discourse grabs the next posts for it's autoscroll.
And, if auto polling is that bad, then why have it? If it crashes a site with 100 users, then why implement it? Your excuse makes the site broken whether or not auto-polling is possible.
-
Hello, Git user here.
No. No he is not.
Considering the name maybe it was competently created with the sole purpose of annoying you .
-
Hello, Git user here.
What? I thought you used SourceTree.
https://www.sourcetreeapp.com/images/logoSourceTree.png
That doesn't say "Torvalds" on it, does it?
-
-
I'm actually interested to see how this turns out. Eevee had a bad time doing this in the linked story, but he's using his personal machine. Like most dev's personal machines, it had a pile of weird stuff done to it for reasons long since forgotten. How would it work on a fresh server with a admin who only kinda knows Ruby? Let's find out!
It doesn't bother me much, but I only visit once in a while and don't use it on mobile or spend hours trying to post weird stuff. It is kinda telling that all of the heavy posters seem to hate it. And The Real WTF is the dev team's attitude - closing and deleting bugs and banning volunteer reporters for reporting bugs. They seem more interested in playing the Famous Tech Startup Founder game than actually making quality software.
-
I brought the entire server down for like 5 minutes by trying to onebox a /t/1k post
-
I use git and find it a great piece of software.
Oh, you won't use it via the CLI?
there's your problem
-
I brought the entire server down for like 5 minutes by trying to
onebox a /t/1k postuse it.FTFY.
-
Nah, that just brings my client down for 5 minutes.
Being able to DOS the server for 5 minutes is a whole new level of stupid
-
I use git and find it a great piece of software.
Yeah you're wrong.
Oh, you won't use it via the CLI?
If you ignore all the missing features, and the strange terminology that makes it difficult to use even for CLI users, then I guess maybe it might be slightly this side of "acceptable".
-
Yeah you're wrong.
No, you're wrong.
If you ignore all the missing features, and the strange terminology that makes it difficult to use even for CLI users, then I guess maybe it might be slightly this side of "acceptable".
It's easy to ignore that which doesn't exist. So yes, it's very acceptable indeed.
-
missing features
Alright then, I'll bite.
What features does SourceTree have that real git doesn't?
-
-
I cannot get over how badly it handles images.
If I right-click on any single image on this whole site and do "search GIS for this image", it manages to transfer the image from Discourse to Google's servers and do a lookup in no time flat. If I paste an image into Discourse from Google Image Search, it not only takes quite a few seconds to appear (about twice as long as pasting the same image into a new email in Gmail; unlike Gmail, not even a placeholder image shows up, just a progress bar, and I've seen it fuck up the placement if I keep typing while that appears, so it might as well be a modal), half the time it stalls out at 100% and never embeds.
The other day, I gave up, pasted the address instead (that showed up right away, no questions asked, because it's my browser and not the slow-ass server trying to receive and store the bits), and submitted the reply without hitting cancel (muscle memory doesn't notice the greyed-out reply button, and neither do keyboard shortcuts). I went to another thread and opened a reply.... and it's STILL PROCESSING. What? At that point it was well and truly stuck, I had to refresh.
-
unlike Gmail, not even a placeholder image shows up
But you get the "[Uploading...]()" text! In link format that's not the link format that's used for the actual image, but if you try to delete or change a letter of it, you won't get a link after the upload.
-
I cannot get over how badly it handles images.
I suspect it's all getting run through imagemagick for resize and recoloring. Though it's possible they fixed the recoloring thing.
-
I suspect it's all getting run through imagemagick for resize and recoloring.
https://meta.discourse.org/t/uploaded-emoji-images-appear-to-be-getting-cropped/25446/3
@PJH said:@zogstrip said:
We automatically resize emojis to make sure they stay small. Might not be the right defaults?
Can you make a check on the image and only resize if it exceeds (configurable?) limits?
For instance that line is doing the exact opposite of what you intended with my image:
Original: 4.42K
Your 'optimized' image: 39.73KYou've basically made the image 10 times larger than it was, while breaking what it represents
-
That's a good link to go along with this topic. The ensuing back and forth between Jeff and his minion is educational.
-
The ensuing back and forth between Jeff and his minion is educational.
https://meta.discourse.org/t/uploaded-emoji-images-appear-to-be-getting-cropped/25446/9
@Jeff said:We should be enforcing it on the files as well. Emoji are not irregularly sized.. none of them are. They're square.
Until they get CSS'd to within an inch of their lives. c.f. avatars.
-
@@codingwhorror said:
Someone's uploading emoji of the wrong size and expecting our resizer to fix it! Quick, block emoji uploads that aren't the right pixel dimensions!!! CLOSED_DOING_IT_WRONG
POST CAN'T BE EMPTY
-
@Jeff said:
We should be enforcing it on the files as well. Emoji are not irregularly sized.. none of them are. They're square.
riiiiight.... Just because none of the standard ones are, and you can't think of a reason to have a nonstandard one that isn't that necessarily means that it is impossible to have an emoji that is non square and thus wanting a non-square emoji is doing it wrong.
classic JDGI
-
> Someone's uploading emoji of the wrong size and expecting our resizer to fix it!
Actually I was uploading emoji of the wrong size and expecting their software to LEAVE IT THE FUCK ALONE!
-
Until they get CSS'd to within an inch of their lives. c.f. avatars.
Yeah, but then minion subverted His Will and made it configurable.
-
@mott555 said:
> Someone's uploading emoji of the wrong size and expecting our resizer to fix it!
Actually I was uploading emoji of the wrong size and expecting their software to LEAVE IT THE FUCK ALONE!
The "have discourse do something right" thread is over
Also, I love how when you autocomplete and type in one of our custom emoji, rather than getting a preview of the emoji itself, you get a 16x16 version of the entire sprite sheet:
http://i.imgur.com/Ry03Lz9.png
edit is that the entire sprite sheet, or is that a fucked up version of "arrows"? Hmm.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
edit is that the entire sprite sheet, or is that a fucked up version of "arrows"? Hmm.
That's the same graphic as , only how it would appear if I hadn't hacked the site CSS to stop it in posts:
.emoji[title=":arrows:"] { height: 20px; width: 220px; }
-
That's a squished version of arrows, "the fish".
-
Wait.. what the shit then?
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Wait.. what the shit then?
Yep, those are alright (just less blurry ). Apparently thanks to starting with "a", they also became an icon for the "custom emoji" tab?
-
half the time it stalls out at 100% and never embeds
That doesn't happen for me (ever, AFAICR), but you are absolutely right, of course, about it being dog-slow.
-
It's slow enough that it might as well be stalled out, from what I've seen
-
@codnghorror said:
Emoji are not irregularly sized.. none of them are. They're square.
Actually, they're Unicode characters that originally were nonstandard Japanese phone company emoticons.
-
It's slow enough that it might as well be stalled out
Nah, what I'm talking about, there's clearly been an error, it'll never finish, but it thinks it's at 100% and about to complete.
-
And now try it with a space after.
-
10.
-
But you get the "Uploading..." text! In link format that's not the link format that's used for the actual image, but if you try to delete or change a letter of it, you won't get a link after the upload.
Almost as if they do a search/replace for that exact text (
[Uploading...]()
)at the end of the upload process? Why, there's no way that could possibly go wrong!
-
Hmm...
Uploading...
Uploading...
Uploading...
Uploading...
Uploading...
Uploading...
Uploading...
Uploading...