vBulletin.org ~ Hack's being posted; most do not get upgraded to latest version of vB

[Scott MacVicar]

I updated the hack you were moaning about and it works fine on 2.2.6, I even updated the instructions to make it simplier for people to read.

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24722

[DirectPixel]

PPN: You should have a PayPal donate button in your sig.

[Scott MacVicar]

I'm not talking to paypal at the moment lol

Read the other thread regarding my problems if you want to know why.

[N9ne]

That was very kind of you Scott. I'm sorry if I came across harsh in my first post, I wasn't using your hack as a staple arguement, I was just commenting on the overall situation of vb.org.

But many thanks to you for doing this, I know you went out of your way to do this, and I'm sorry if I've caused you any hassle or trouble.

[JTMON]

Originally posted by heretic
I have that hack with 2.2.5 and it works fine....

Hmm, shouldn't this have negated this whole thread? lol I thought this thread was gonna be a complaint that the version numbers in the hacks [2.2.5] aren't being updated. I tried to update a hack that I released to change the version number but I couldn't. I think that updating the version numbers or allowing the hack poster to do so would be a good thing.

I totally agree with most of what everyone said here regarding hackers not HAVING to update the hack etc etc......

I disagree with the statements that they shouldn't have to support them at all. That's what vb.org was last I knew, a place to release and get support for released hacks. It MUST be that way or they wouldn't specifically ASK you to put a "No support" message in the first post if you don't plan on providing support. If you don't want to offer support I think you should at least HAVE to put the No support text in.

I think it's generally thought that vb.org is where to go for hacks AND support of those hacks. I do not agree with the attitudes of the people *****ing though and fully agree with those that say RTFM or RAFPHPB in this instance

[chrispadfield]

I disagree, I feel the mistake is that we are asking hackers to explicitly say there is no support for hacks. It is pretty clear that 95% here understand that you can't expect or demand support so I am not sure why that notice is there. It should be the other way round. If you get free support count yourself lucky if you don't move on to something else.

[werehere]

Originally posted by Skeptical
I think if a particular hack isn't being updated for a new version, that it be taken off vb.org. That way unsuspecting newcomers don't try to install it and mess up their scripts in the process.

Kinda like Matt Wright's form mail. That thing is filled with security holes, yet people on the net are still offering it everywhere. As a result, many web hosts have to ban that script manually.

I think it should be left with the version number it is for. You see, it is much easier to pick apart a hack for an older version, if it is already created. So just label the version number it is for, and leave the damn thing there.

Vb.org is young, give it time to match up to UBBDev. The UBB has been out there much longer, and had a very large hacking community behind it (but many are coming over here in time, including myself). I do not believe they offer support any differently than here, only that they may have more hackers with time on their hands to try and make sure hacks are released with updates.

There should be nothing required of hackers to make updates, since they do it for free as it is, and if you start haggling them over doing something nice, I am afraid you will see some of them move on from helping anyone at all...

[bigmattyh]

I disagree with the statements that they shouldn't have to support them at all.

I would like to ask you this: How long should a hacker provide support? A month? A year? Forever? Should he be required to upgrade the hack every time there is a version change to vB?

To anyone who's still confused on this issue, let me ask you a question: What is it, do you think, that motivates hackers to release the hacks that they've created? What is it that release the hacks that they've worked on to you -- without any kind of compensation?

[JTMON]

My point is valid though because vb.org has the statement saying you are to say you do NOT provide support if in fact you plan on NOT providing support.

As for the version numbers, if the hack works on 2.2.5 but was released for 2.2.3 then why should it be left saying 2.2.3 when it's known that it works on current versions. How does the version number in the title dictate how easy it is to pull apart the code? Especially if there are no code changes to make the hack work on a current forum?

I don't think they should be required to update a hack at all, I just think that if a hack released for 2.2.3 has been tested and is known to work on 2.2.5 then why aren't the version numbers changed the way that they USED to be anyways.

As for not expecting support. I don't know where the 95% figure comes from Chris. I'd say the fact that vb.org is full of released hacks with support threads, and the fact that the hack db they made points to the specific SUPPORT threads proves that a lot of people expect some kind of support unless the hacker has stated he isn't supporting it.

I think it's totally bogus for anyone to say they HAVE to support/update them though.

[JTMON]

To anyone who's still confused on this issue, let me ask you a question: What is it, do you think, that motivates hackers to release the hacks that they've created? What is it that release the hacks that they've worked on to you -- without any kind of compensation?

Maybe they are interested in making vbb better like the rest of us who don't hack yet provide support here and other places for vbulletin also without compensation!

[bigmattyh]

I think it would be wise for vB.org to change its official statement of policy. It needs to be stated that these hacks are provided only via the efforts of hackers, and no promises of support or future versions are guaranteed. And then something along the lines of the GNU public license, like "No warranties are expressed or implied, nor any fitness of purpose for a given environment, these hacks are provided AS-IS, yadda yadda yadda."

But common sense and a little less of the gimme-gimme attitude would solve most of these conflicts.

[JTMON]

I think A LOT less gimme gimme would work. If they change their policy then they have to go edit their hack db.

[DirectPixel]

Originally posted by JTMON


Maybe they are interested in making vbb better like the rest of us who don't hack yet provide support here and other places for vbulletin also without compensation!

Yes, but does that mean they HAVE to provide support? Of course not.

When people work for free, it is under their terms, not yours. You can reverse that by paying them. Since the hackers are not being paide (for the most part), then they're working under their terms.

There's nothing that legally says they HAVE to provide support. The ones who do are doing it because they have some time and just happen to be online and are in the mood to answer questions.

The ones who don't, they probably have very justifiable situations where they cannot help their uers.

I think it's best that if you really want a custom script, and/or your current one doesn't work and nobody's willing to support it, you should hire someone to do it. *cough* *cough*.

[JTMON]

Originally posted by eiSecure
Yes, but does that mean they HAVE to provide support? Of course not.

No, and two posts in a row I said they don't HAVE to provide support. The problem comes when they release it in a place that basically expects support from them. Then I believe it's vb.org's terms. If the hackers don't like it, release it elsewhere or don't release it

As for people working for free under their terms. You ever volunteer in your life? I don't think you get to say how and when or what your going to do once the company you're volunteering for gets their hands on ya. By releasing them at vb.org they have to go by vb.org's rules just like the rest of us.

I don't have the support issues that this thread is about and as I pointed out I think this whole thread is bull since the hack he was complaining about WORKS for 2.2.5.

[rylin]

Originally posted by JTMON
The problem comes when they release it in a place that basically expects support from them. Then I believe it's vb.org's terms. If the hackers don't like it, release it elsewhere or don't release it

Actually, quite a few hacks (everything pre vbulletin.org launch) were released here on the vbulletin.com forums, and there was no such requirement (to post a note wether or not support was given) at the time...