New Slash Version v1.0.3

pudge writes "Yo. We released slash-1.0.3. Bug reports and CVS and file downloads are on SourceForge. Slashcode is now hosted at Exodus with Slashdot and Freshmeat. " The scary part is that now Slashdot and Slashcode are totally synched up... which means programmers can e-mail diffs instead of bug reports and feature suggestions (hint hint hint!)

Comments

What did you do with CmdrTaco?!

[Longing]

Slashcode and Slashdot are synched up? Who are you, and what did you do with CmdrTaco?! We demand his release!!

Re:What did you do with CmdrTaco?!

[El Volio]

"Slashcode and Slashdot are synched up? Who are you, and what did you do with CmdrTaco?! We demand his release!"

Every time you ask about his release, they'll keep him in captivity for another 24 hours...

feature suggestions

[ChristTrekker]

• Valid HTML 4.
• A set of style rules that doesn't blind a guy when reading BSD or Apache sections.

Re:feature suggestions

[dingbat_hp]

I'd support XHTML (but go easy on the CSS), but not XML. XML doesn't allow much extra that can't be achieved anyway by screen scraping, and that's pretty easy in XHTML (Palm portallers, read the last para before screaming at me).

The only real benefit from going with XML would be for people who wanted to leech Slashdot content and rebadge it on other sites in a fairly greedy manner. This isn't something that many will want, nor should it be encouraged. If there's a demand for headline and link-swapping between sites, then use RSS - it's what it's there for.

The downside of XML, is that it's compatible with nothing out there browser-wise and so you'd inevitably fall back to a two-formats legacy position, probably involving HTML 3.2 for the lesser stream.

XHTML Transitional doesn't break any existing browsers, and it still lets you use enough format control to make it viewable on old Netscapes. A good push for WAI standards on Slash content would fit in with an XHTML move and would probably benefit people doing portals for wireless and small-screen devices. I certainly don't think that wireless portalling needs XML (with a SlashSchema) instead of XHTML.

Re:Don't you think it's time to switch from Slash?

[luckykaa]

Rewrite it in VBScript so that it runs locally on compliant browsers.

Sorry..... I'll shoot myself now.

Suggestions for discussion

[Hrunting]

Here's a few things to bandy about (no need for actual diffs).

Theming
Everyone bitches about the colors, especially in the BSD and Apache sections (and, I must say, YRO isn't much better). Why not setup a colors preferences panel? That shouldn't be too hard to implement.

Removal of Comments
Given the recent controversy over Microsoft and what not, give users the ability to remove their own comments, maybe with a karma penalty or something. We can moderate our system, but we can't responsibly manage it.

That's just a couple of ideas, and there's tons more, I'm sure. On to Slash 2.0!

Re:So fix it!

[pudge]

Do NOT send it to CmdrTaco. Or me, or CowboyNeal, or CaptTofu. Use SourceForge for bugs and patches and feature requests.

As to us "not knowing SQL" (I am not sure if that is tongue-in-cheek or not), well, all I can say is that there is a lot of really old code in there. Sure, you are going to see a lot of cruft. We're working hard on rewriting major portions of the thing. You may see some code in there that does nothing at all, or does nothing useful, or does something bad. All I can say to that is "duh." Send a patch or a bug report if you like, we will certainly appreciate it.

But don't bother pointing out that, gasp, bugs and bad code are in Slash. That's a given. That's why we are working so hard on it and devoting so many resources to it (four full-time developers, IIRC, not including CmdrTaco, plus several more, like Cliff, who are splitting time with Slash and other projects). The code was pretty good for what it was, but over time it got crufty, and now we are going back and fixing it. That's how these things work.