[Sam Bauers]

See [2133]

Running the latest trunk you need this to start your forum loops…

<?php if ( bb_forums( array( 'order_by' => 'forum_name' ) ) ) : ?>

...

<?php endif; ?>

[johnhiler]

I think the latest .9 version is 0.9.0.4?

https://trac.bbpress.org/report/2

The only list of function names that I know of was pulled together by _ck_:

http://bbshowcase.org/reference/

[michael3185]

Yeah, I use NightGunner’s PM, and it’s a gem. As to the legal side, I know so-called civilisation has become litigation mad, but you just put it in a nutshell yourself; “bbPress Certified”. If it’s in quotes, it’s ‘a quote from someone’, and not legally binding as a testimonial (at least here in the UK, which is why all our adverts are wrapped in quotes). I’m sure with the millions of dollars Automatic were given recently, they could easily get advice on making it litigation safe too.

You know, it doesn’t have to be much of a big thing from this end, but it’d inspire confidence in ‘the outside world’, by which I mean those who want Open Source software, but not problems, as they’re not coders or forum hounds. On the inside it could be very simple indeed, ie;

1. Is the code neat and readable? 1 star.

2. Uses the the proper hooks and function calls? +1 star.

3. Works instantly with the current ‘safe’ release? + 1 star.

4. Doesn’t affect, and isn’t affected by, other plugins? +1 star.

etc.

User ratings could go alongside it as an extra, and us forum hounds can carry on as usual. However – and it’s a big however in the eyes of the outside world – the creators of bbPress (and their other systems) gain massive kudos, and therefore, a larger user base. Imagine a press release;

“Sammy Surfer, creator of burblePress said today; We’re into the next generation of forum software. What we’ve realised is that most folks want it to run straight out of the box. We have a compact and powerful core engine, and are announcing our new certification system for plugins. Plugins allow users to develop additional functionality, and while we can’t guarantee code others produce, we do look at and rate plugins. In fact, plugins are key to making burblePress do what you want it to do, so get involved!”

Etc., etc., ad nauseam.

Funny, don’t you think, that no Open Source forum producers have had the balls to do this yet..? But I’ll tell you this: the first one who does will have their name in lights. Do M$ produce amazing, unbeatable code which rules the world? Do they hell. Have they grabbed the world’s attentions and millions of users simply because they set their own standards? You bet your damned underpants. I hope Sam reads this, and throws his own undies to the wind.

[Arturo]

hi, i’ve a deep-integration, wpmu 2.7.1 + bp 1.0 +bbpress latest trunk i’ve created a theme and integrated it in bbpress, i’ve added wp_head() and wp_footer() to show the buddybar (buddypress admin bar) but the buddybar doesn’t show… i’ve tested the same theme with bbpress 0.9.0.4 and the buddybar is shown without problem.

any idea to fix this problem? thanks for the reply

[arandomdan]

I’m running WP 2.7.1 and bbPress Version 1.0-rc-1 on localhost. WP has been installed to /3dd/ and I installed bbPress to /3dd/bbpress/ today and have done all the proper steps for syncing in the bbPress admin.

I have added the following code to bb-config.php:

require(BB_PATH . '../wp-blog-header.php');<br />

define('WP_AUTH_COOKIE_VERSION', 1);<br />

$bb->bb_xmlrpc_allow_user_switching = true;

I can login to both WP and bbPress with my WP user account (yay!), but <b>the problem is that WP doesn’t know when I logged in to bbPress and vice versa</b> (i.e. when I am logged into WP, bbPress still shows the login form). In addition, <b>when I login to bbPress, WP logs me out; and when I login to WP, I am no longer logged in on bbPress</b>. I have cleared my cookies many times and tried it in both IE and Firefox, same result.

Together, WP and bbPress create the following cookies (aside from the wp-settings and test cookies):

Domain                  Cookie name<br />

/3dd/                   wordpress_logged_in_*<br />

/3dd/wp-admin           wordpress_*<br />

/3dd/wp-content/plugins wordpress_*<br />

/3dd/bbpress/bb-admin   wordpress_*<br />

/3dd/bbpress/bb-plugins wordpress_*<br />

/3dd/bbpress/my-plugins wordpress_*<br />

/3dd                    wordpress_logged_in_*<br />

I believe the last 4 are created by bbPress and it should be noted that there is no trailing slash on the wordpress_logged_in_* cookie path.

Does anyone know what the problem might be?

[johnhiler]

Trying to grok the vision here… bbPress would have a top-down certification model, where someone would audit the code of all plugins and do testing to certify that the plugins work in various bbPress versions?

[Tynan Beatty]

Yesterday I updated a public site with a relatively inactive and fresh bbP forum from WP2.7.x and bbP1.0alpha-6 with the bbPress Integration 1.0-alpha-4.1 plugin…

to WP2.8-beta2-11509 and bbP1.0-rc-1 with the bbPress Integration 1.0-rc-2 plugin.

I haven’t done extensive testing, but the integration worked flawlessly before the upgrade (following Sam’s video tutorial sticky to the letter), and seems to work almost as well now.

The one scenario I’ve found where it doesn’t work is users logging in from bbP cannot logout from WP. All other bbP/WP login/logout combinations seem to behave as expected; however the only way I could get this to happen was to not add the wp-config.php changes suggested by the bbPress Integration plugin. When I did add those changes it broke at least WP login entirely.

I did a little bit of testing with different combinations of the definitions the bbPress Integration plugin suggests, and the details can be found in this post.

peace~

[Tynan Beatty]

I just upgraded a public site from the latest WP2.7.x to the latest WP2.8-beta2 and decided to upgrade the site’s bbP1.0alpha6 and the bbP Integration plugin that was made for that version (all working as expected).

I was having similar problems with wp2.8-beta2-11509 and bbp1.0-rc-1, using the bbPress Integration 1.0-rc-2 plugin. I found that adding it’s suggested changes to my wp-config.php was causing the problems. I also removed the integration speedups suggested from the bbP admin ‘WordPress Integration’ settings. Now I haven’t tested registration from the bbPress end, but everything else seems to work back and forth. Here’s what I have near the bottom of wp-config.php with everything working:

define('WPLANG', '');

define('COOKIEPATH', '/');



/* That's all, stop editing! Happy blogging. */

Where the '/' might be a '/subfolder/'

And here is the bottom of bb-config.php:

define('BB_LANG', '');

?>

The only thing I’ve found not working thus far is users logging in from the bbP side cannot log out from the WP side. Everything else seems integrated for logins/logouts (login/out from WP, login from WP/out from bbP, login/out from bbP).

This is a minor issue compared to not being able to login to WP at all when using the suggested bbP integration changes to wp-config. I also have all 4 random keys matching between configs, including the nonces (which I don’t think were mentioned in the integration video post, but I don’t remember now). I hope there’s a fix for the login from bbP/logout from WP in the next release of the Integration Plugin, and I also hope that the issue doesn’t affect registration from bbP (since it seems to be related to the plugin). Great work on this so far Sam

On a side note, further testing suggested that it was the ‘SITECOOKIEPATH’ definition causing the inability to login from WP, and the ‘COOKIEHASH’ definition seems to allow WP login, but break the integration.

peace~

[timskii]

The memcached information is useful to know. And based on what I’ve found below, will logically make an absolutely huge difference. Closer to “requires memcached” on a busy forum.

You see, I’ve done some more tests. And BBPress seems to do a lot of simple queries to check information that generally doesn’t change.

I’ve hooked up _ck_’s excellent BB-Benchmark, and started looking for patterns. I assume this picks up everything in 1.0.

As a general rule, page rendering (after queries) is very slightly slower with 1.0. That can probably be explained simply by twice the volume (in bytes) of files typically being executed from 0.9.4 to 1.0. Only about 10ms difference. So, not an issue.

The crux of the problem is the volume of queries. The fastest query execution is 1ms – measured, it seems, to within 0.1ms – although I’m unsure of that accuracy. This may be due to the way the database is hosted – mySQL is on a separate machine, which is logically going to impose a delay in getting results back.

1.0’s slowest query is faster than 0.9.4. But 1.0 executes vastly more queries: It’s almost inevitable that 40 queries will takes longer to execute than 10 queries, because there is such a significant overhead associated with “running a query”, regardless of its complexity.

Here are examples of what I found:

On the front page, forum views, and tag views, many pairs of queries are being run that look like:

SELECT * FROM wp_users WHERE ID = ‘n’

SELECT meta_key, meta_value FROM wp_usermeta WHERE user_id = ‘n’ /* WP_Users::append_meta */

My first thought was that my templates or plugins were broken. But disabling everything, and switching to the default theme, still causes all these pairs of queries to be executed.

The only reason I can see for the first query is to extract the display name for each of the last post authors. I can’t see any requirement for the second query, unless you were trying to augment the name with some extra information, like a title.

The topic table contains a last poster field, but it cannot contain the display name, presumably because the display name can be changed on a whim, while the old username was unchanging. If you have a lot of active posters (rather than a handful), a 20-post-per-page view could easily require 40 individual queries, just to check a piece of information that probably has not changed.

Now, we can argue that there should be some element of caching of the display name in the topics table. I wouldn’t have a problem with, for example, always seeing the name the user displayed when they posted, rather than the name they are currently using. But there’s also a compromise position, where the last poster name is only checked against wp_users at intervals.

Profile views repeat this a lot:

SELECT meta_key, meta_value FROM bb_meta WHERE object_type = ‘bb_post’ AND object_id = n /* bb_append_meta */

And I’m only displaying recent replies.

Turning to a topic page. I’ve looked at the first 20 posts in a 260+ post-long topic. A real mix of users, some who have added a lot of custom data (I allow quite a lot to be added, which is stored in wp_usermeta). This is painful: 30ms total query time on 0.9.4, 120ms on 1.0. 14 queries plays 79 queries.

Again, the key weakness is duplication of ostensibly similar queries. Line after line of:

SELECT meta_key, meta_value FROM bb_meta WHERE object_type = ‘bb_post’ AND object_id = n /* bb_append_meta */

or

SELECT * FROM wp_users WHERE ID = ‘n’

or

SELECT post_id FROM bb_posts WHERE topic_id = n AND post_status = 0 ORDER BY post_id ASC LIMIT 1

In contrast, 0.9.4 manages to decide all the IDs it needs, throws them all into one query, and presumably lets the PHP split out the results. The wp_usermeta data continues to be pulled out in such a manner:

SELECT user_id, meta_key, meta_value FROM wp_usermeta WHERE user_id IN (n,n,n,n…) /* WP_Users::append_meta */

In 3ms. Bargain.

Keep in mind, you won’t see this pattern if your forum contains 20 posts by you. You must have the variety of posters, that tends to only be found on larger forums.

My gut feeling is that some of the loops aren’t terribly well optimized. Or not well optimized for remote databases. Or not well optimized for operation without a secondary cache. Something’s instinctively not right.

[eraticdance]

Does anyone know what cookies should be generated when you’re logged in as admin and using user integration?

In the video tutorial on bbpress integration, there were 3 bb- type keys, but I don’t see any. all I see are the wordpress_test_cookie and the wordpress_logged_in_xxxxxx cookies. Has the cookie handling been changed for WPMU? If someone could point me to any documentation on this I’d appreciate it.

[Arturo]

chris i can’t find my ticket in trac… but is the “same” text in this 3d.

hey JohnJJ, i use bbpress 0.9.0.4 with mu+bp and with the latest trunk i’ve problem with deep-integration and buddybar you remember? but with 0.9.0.4 i’ve resolved this problem.

[michael3185]

Yep, the idea of a minimal core engine with stable plugin hooks sounds the best way to me too, even as a non-developer.

Something I’m sure would help is a standard for plugins. I think too many people are put off when the core doesn’t have a function they want, but yippee; there’s a plugin! Then after many hours of frustration, ah crap; this fails too, and here we go with the forum questions again. It also makes the product look bad, even though the plugin developer may not be related to that product in any way.

A ‘bbPress Certified’ system would give users more confidence, and raise the bar for forum development as the outside world perceives it. I can see that plugin developers work hard to get things right for others, and every eventuality can’t be tested for of course. However, I also know from struggling very hard with different forum packages over the last 6 weeks that there really are no standards, and on a couple of systems people seem to have jumped on the plugin bandwagon because it’s fun and brings kudos. In one case, I found myself delving into posts from as far back as 2005 in an attempt to get something simple working. They have a massive forum, but it’s jam packed with ‘How can I make this work?!’ posts going back years. (bbPress is a gem by comparison, which is why I’m still here).

Non-programmers see a plugin on a ‘legitimate’ forum and naturally assume it’s going to work properly. Not everyone’s into hacking around, and some have no time or inclination to do so whatsoever, especially working people who want Open Source software but need it to just work out of the box. On the other side of a crucial plugin may sit a very competent programmer with great ideas, but it can just as easily be a school kid who’s learned a bit of php and doesn’t have the experience to make their ideas actually work. There’s no way of knowing, unless they post in an obviously off-putting way. The current user rating system looks good, but is quickly dismissed when two or three 5 star plugins fail.

Any standard takes time and effort in the background to assess the code others produce, though it sounds like that’s already being done anyway. I submitted a very simple plugin and wondered why it hadn’t appeared on the forum, and another member mentioned that it can take a while for it to be reviewed. If some checks were done for code readability, apparent competence, etc., as well as the checks already being done for maliciousness and obvious bugs, then you’ve got a working standard. If someone submits something your programmers can see is messily written, uses innapropriate function calls, etc., then they get a ‘Sorry, it doesn’t reach our standards’ email. Maybe a Certified bbPress Star System; 1 star – not rated; 2 stars – appears competent, or is excellent but has no admin panel; 3 stars excellent structure and use of core functions, and has admin panel, and so-on. No guarantees, but at least we’d know to go for 3 stars or more, or if you love to play, grab the 1 star and have fun improving it. Kudos for both developers! The user ratings could be left in as an extra, though casual, system.

It doesn’t really have to be any more labour intensive than at present, and if bbPress and associated systems want to be taken even more seriously in the working world, then standards for plugin development are essential.

[bzmillerboy]

I tried deleting uft8_general_ci from my wp_config.php file and left it blank during the install however now I’m getting the following error.

Referrer is OK, beginning installation…

>>> Setting up custom user table constants

Step 1 – Creating database tables

>>> Modifying database: bria5519_buddypresstest (localhost)

>>>>>> Table: bb_forums

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

>>>>>> Table: bb_meta

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

>>>>>> Table: bb_posts

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

>>>>>> Table: bb_terms

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

>>>>>> Table: bb_term_relationships

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

>>>>>> Table: bb_term_taxonomy

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

>>>>>> Table: bb_topics

>>>>>>>>> Creating table

>>>>>>>>>>>> Done

Step 2 – WordPress integration (optional)

>>> WordPress address (URL): http://brianandlindsaymiller.com/buddypresstest/

>>> Blog address (URL): http://brianandlindsaymiller.com/buddypresstest/

>>> WordPress cookie keys set.

>>> WordPress “auth” cookie salt set from input.

>>> WordPress “secure auth” cookie salt set from input.

>>> WordPress “logged in” cookie salt set from input.

>>> User database table prefix: wp_

>>> WordPress MU primary blog ID: 1

Step 3 – Site settings

>>> Site name: BuddyPressTestForums

>>> Site address (URL): http://brianandlindsaymiller.com/buddypresstest/forums/

>>> From email address: bzmiller@fuse.net

>>> Key master created

>>>>>> Username: keymasteradmin

>>>>>> Email address: bzmiller@fuse.net

>>>>>> Password:

>>> Description: Just another bbPress community

>>> Forum could not be created!

>>> Making plugin directory at /home/bria5519/public_html/buddypresstest/forums/my-plugins/.

>>> Making theme directory at /home/bria5519/public_html/buddypresstest/forums/my-templates/.

>>> Key master email sent

There were some errors encountered during installation!

[itissue]

I tested it out and it sort of works but when I miss just a few characters in the captcha, I still pass the test. It’s only when the thing I type is way off that it works. That’s probably how reCaptcha has it set up though. I guess it should be fine since bots shouldn’t be able to read images. We’ll see. Thanks for taking the time to code it into a plugin though dchest. It’s just what I’ve been looking for.

It does clash with bbPM though. I’m not sure what it is that’s doing it, but I can’t use both this and bbPM together.

[michael3185]

Thanks for all the excellent advice. I do like hacking around, but as I need to get a couple of forums up and running I’m best with 0.9.0.4 right now. I think that sticking with it until 1.0 has been well tested – and has the plugins or functionality I need – is the best bet too.

I’ve spent around six weeks or more trying everything under the sun, until finally settling on bbPress. Mostly, it just works. I don’t think I want to do much more than learn a little php and more css as I go along. I’m remembering that there are people outside this room, and conversation, and beer… Hacking about in the guts of things is interesting and really very addictive, but there’s life out there! Love all you folks for making it possible though, I have to say.

[dss]

I’ve got the latest version of WP and BBP

So that’s BBPress 1.0 rc-1

and WP 2.7.1

In my wp-config I have the Secure Auth Key but in the WordPress options.php there’s no “secure auth salt” so i have no idea how to find this and use it for integration.

[thekmen]

I can’t really add to the argument except to say that I never tried any older versions, so downloaded RC1 last week & love it. I only have one issue mentioned in another thread, I can’t get the function bb_new_topic_link();

to work but have worked around that for the moment using hardcoded links. The function is only used in 3 places so it’s not much of an issue.

I am using it on a live site for less than a week now – http://xfactor-updates.com/forum/ – its quiet at the moment but will get busy & fully tested in the next few months

As WordPress 2.8 is due out the door any day with it’s new widget classes, a lot of themes will have to be upgraded to take advantage of the changes so I can see a lot of people leaving WordPress 2.5, 2.72 and so on behind and making the switch to 2.8.

The sooner bbPress can be fully integrated with WP 2.8 the better in my opinion.

[johnhiler]

Great points, timskii!

One note – it’s now possible to integrate bbPress v.9 with the latest versions of WordPress, using either of the plugins here:

https://bbpress.org/plugins/topic/freshly-baked-cookies/

http://superann.com/2009/02/26/wordpress-26-27-bbpress-09-cookie-integration-plugin/

I share your concerns about bbPress becoming bloated. I hope the platform doesn’t go down that path… that would be the main thing that would eventually drive me off of bbPress.

[timskii]

I’ve been “testing” 1.0 out privately over the last week, primarily by re-writing my custom code and templates, and then working through every user operation (to check both my changes, and the underlying software). So I’ll try and play devil’s advocate to _ck_’s “don’t upgrade!”

From the user’s perspective, little has changed. The most significant feature to pull out is the use of Display Names. That’s a huge plus on an “international” forum, because users can now set their names to contain non-English characters. And there’s no need to workaround empty display names in WordPress (when a user registers via BBPress).

Templating is similarly unchanged. About the most significant change is that the contents of tag-form.php can no longer be altered via a template – which was likely never required anyway. Semantically, existing oddities remain (like the profile edit is still a table), and usability can be clunky in places (when you register successfully, there’s a message that tells you to log in, but nothing immediately helpful, like a login screen).

Plugins very much depends on how deep they go. The only place I stumbled was in user roles, where the underlying code had completely altered. But I’m not using many plugins, and the custom code I had been using, I’d been prepared to rewrite. (Most of it was a mess anyway!) A clear “your mileage may vary” caveat, and particular risk if one doesn’t understand enough programming to work round anything that breaks.

Technically, 1.0 feels fairly solid. I have found glitches, but nothing worse than some of the 0.9 versions. 1.0 does perform many more database queries. Like 50 on certain pages. Although it is hard for me to assess the load implications without running it on a public site. Integration worked OK as an upgrade, once I’d realised that the upgrade did not automatically add the new cookie-related keys (which needed to be added manually to the existing config files). The whole package feels more “bloated”, but that may be more the fault of WordPress than BBPress. I just hope BBPress doesn’t evolve into the messy, feature-overloaded forum software I had been trying to avoid.

So, if I was just running BBPress, on balance I’d stick with 0.9, at least until the dust settles on 1.0.

But. There’s a but.

If nobody uses 1.0, hardly anyone is debugging it, hardly anything gets fixed, and so on. There’s a danger of putting 1.0 on the shelf, waiting for someone else to finish it, and then wondering why the bugs never get found. So even if you aren’t running it on a live site, it might be useful to try it out privately.

Rightly or wrongly, WordPress 2.5.1 makes me increasingly nervous: As times goes on, I’m going to find plugins and templates that aren’t designed for that version. And while it is claimed that 2.5.1 has no security flaws, if almost nobody is using it, the chance of any flaw getting found and reported is also low. In contrast, the latest version is sure to get picked apart and patched back up very quickly.

And then I started to look at BuddyPress, and… I don’t even know if it’s possible to run that on top of 2.5.1. But you can see the way I’m starting to think: An old BBPress is itself rooting me in the past. And while I knew it was unfinished software when I started using it, I had rather assumed it would at least keep pace with WordPress, not get left a year behind.

So right now, it’s a rather person decision. All other things being equal, I tend to agree with _ck_.

However, I see a lot of WordPress 2.7+ blogs with phpBB forums hosted alongside. And naturally no integration between them. In the near future, that’s the first big, obvious “market” for BBPress. Yet almost all those people need compatability with the latest WordPress. For us “early adopters” that’s important: Some of those new BBPress users will write plugins and templates, and they won’t bother trying to support outdated code. Once that starts to happen, old 0.9 users will find they are missing out – which will probably be the time for most existing users to upgrade.

[michael3185]

Apologies! I just re-uploaded it after you downloaded it, so grab it again. I added a needed plugin to the bbVanilla.zip file, which you should FTP to your my-plugins folder (no need to activate it). That provides a consistent warning/error page for various things.

Also, if you really want the Latest Topics at the top of the front page (a mess in my group’s eyes) then I can show you how add back it easily, or do it for you.

Just noticed on your site (looking sxc by the way); there’s a gap in front of .com in the title (intentional?), and you’ve left the default ‘Just another bbPress community’ message in the banner (Admin, Settings to change).

[michael3185]

Yep, know what you mean. Do install Human Test too – the simple math question stops bots, which can’t answer.

[johnhiler]

Can you check to see if you have the latest version of “My Views” installed?

https://bbpress.org/plugins/topic/my-views/

You need at least 0.1.1 for Hidden Forums to work properly… I remember I used to get an error from Hidden Forums until I upgraded the My Views plugin.

If that’s not the issue, I’m officially stumped!

[michael3185]

I’ve tried messing around in Admin in all sorts of ways, and cannot get Private Forums to reset again now. However, in case it might in future, I’ve installed Hidden Forums to test that. I got the impression it hid the forums from guests completely, but I may be wrong as it has a forum label (which I’ve changed to an asterix to keep things subtle). It fails though. I have the following set up in the php file;

$hidden_forums=array(2,3,4,5,7); // hide these forums, list by comma seperated number

$hidden_forums=array(‘keymaster’,’administrator’);

$hidden_forums[2]=array(‘administrator’,’moderator’, ‘member’);

$hidden_forums[3]=array(‘administrator’,’moderator’, ‘member’);

$hidden_forums[4]=array(‘administrator’,’moderator’, ‘member’);

$hidden_forums[5]=array(‘administrator’,’moderator’, ‘member’);

$hidden_forums[7]=array(‘administrator’,’moderator’, ‘member’);

$hidden_forums=”*”;

But on accessing the front page I get;

Warning: in_array() [function.in-array]: Wrong datatype for second argument in /home/letsdoo/public_html/MB/my-plugins/hidden-forums/hidden-forums.php on line 37

Have I misunderstood the instructions..?

[edit]

I disabled it, and re-enabled Private Forums, and the latter came back with all settings intact and works fine. Hmm…

[john500]

The issue has been resolved and no problem with BBPress Latest Discussion. Only issue is with the Reputation plugin. Can’t get to work in adding and deleting reputation points and developers don’t seem to know how to change so that it does not add reputation points for merely making a posting.

[johnhiler]

This plugin gives registrants a math test before they sign up:

https://bbpress.org/plugins/topic/human-test/

This lets you easily delete spammy signups (you should back up database first, of course!):

https://bbpress.org/plugins/topic/mass-delete-users/

This is a bit hardcore, but you can actually hold new registrations for approval:

https://bbpress.org/plugins/topic/approve-user-registration/

Hopefully one of those will do the trick!