[jrv123]

Fresh install of WP5.2.4, bbPress 2.6.2, and “Basic” theme. (twentynineteen does not give ability to create replies-to-replies.
Goto Settings >> Forums then to “Reply Threading, Enable threaded (nested) replies XX
levels deep”
Set to have “Reply Threading w/ 10 levels deep” (any number will not work)
Create several topics, then create several replies to those topics.
Now create a reply to the first-level reply. Create several.
Now go to “wp_posts” table in the database, and you will see the “post_parent” columns on the nested replies all refer to the topic. (It’s impossible to create a reply-to-a-reply, even though the URL of create link gave a reference to the reply, and NOT the topic.)

[darrk]

So if I read this right your threading isn’t working for your site?

Do you have any other plugins (e.g. image plugins for forums) on your site?

[jrv123]

Nope. I did a virgin install to prove to myself that it was something about the bbPress plugin.

[John James Jacoby]

Hierarchical replies do not use the post_parent column. Replies always use post_parent for the topic ID.

The hierarchy/relationship is instead determined using a piece of postmeta, similar to the topic and forum connections.

So when you say they aren’t working, are they really not working visually, or are they not working the way you expected them to?

We coded them this way, so that all post to post relationships could use the same mechanism, eventually allowing them to be swapped out for something even more performant later (taxonomy connections, or a custom database table.)

[jrv123]

> So when you say they aren’t working, are they really not working
> visually, or are they not working the way you expected them to?
>
They are not working visually, nor the way i would expect them to
work; but my expectations are not what matters here.

Can you suggest a particular theme to use? I ask because I found the
‘Basic’ theme (one of several themes with the word ‘basic’ in its
title), has a horizontal menubar at the top of each reply, that
supposedly allows for creation of ‘replies-to’ each of the listed
replies for a topic. But I’ve never seen any visual indication of
a ‘reply hierarchy’ when using ANY theme, and I have a YahooGroup
that I am moving to a bbPress site, and the hierarchy to the replies
is very important to understanding the flow of messages.

Thank you,

[jrv123]

Where may I find documentation about the meta data (postmeta) for configuring ‘nested replies’ or ‘threaded replies’?

I am trying to import several hundred thousand messages from a soon-to-die YahooGroup; with some of the ‘threaded replies’ nesting as deep as 15 levels from the original topic.

In the YahooGroup archive, some messages ‘copy’ the parent message into the body of the reply, but in others, the author of the reply did NOT include the body of the parent, so it becomes necessary to place the ‘reply’ close to, or under or near, the parent to which the reply belongs.

[jrv123]

Specifically I am looking for some theme that works like is documented here: https://codex.bbpress.org/features/reply-threading/

[jrv123]

As near as i can tell, no matter whether a reply or the original topic is chosen for the parent of the reply, exactly three meta rows are created in “postmeta” table.

_bbp_forum_id, which is always the row of the parent forum
_bbp_topic_id, which is always the row of the parent topic (never the row of the reply), and
_bbp_author_id, which is the ipAddress which created the reply.

_bbp_topic_id always equals the post_parent column of the topic row.

So it seems there is never any ‘hierarchical reply’ information placed into the post meta table; i.e., everything is always a reply to the main topic – so what’s the point of have “nested replies” or “threaded replies”, depending upon one’s nomenclature.

[jrv123]

Try a permanent fix to the code…
Make the fix to line #18 of reply.js (see https://bbpress.org/forums/topic/threaded-replies-not-working/)
All of a sudden, creating replies to replies started adding ‘_bbp_reply_to’ items to the ‘postmeta’ table, where that key has the value of the row to which the reply is being created.
Nested/indented replies suddenly started doing their thing; i.e., indenting to the level of reply-to-reply they are.

[HoCh]

Hi there
Do you know if this “wrong behaviour” is still present in bbPress 2.6.4?
I get
Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property ‘scrollHeight’ of null
at Object.scrollToForm (reply.min.js?ver=2.6.4:3)
at Object.moveForm (reply.min.js?ver=2.6.4:3)
at HTMLAnchorElement.onclick (VM467:570)

This is quite inconvenient since I try to setup a forum for our neighborhood assistance due to the coronavirus lockdown.

[mehrankhanjan]

Hi!
I have a solution.
In wp-content/plugins/bbpress/templates/default/js/reply.min.js
replace (d.scrollHeight) with (64)
that’s it.
my email for more question if you have:
mehrankh1913@gmail.com

[jrv123]

When i look at the corresponding file, “reply.js” (the un-minified version of ‘reply.min.js’), it’s not obvious to me that changing the value of d.scrollHeight to ’64’ will change the creation of the meta rows.

I will take a look at your suggested change this week.

[iphotonica]

Same problem in console. Threaded Replies Not Working. Any idea?

[Robin W]

bbp style pack

once activated go to

dashboard>settings>bbp style pack>bug fixes and enable threaded replies fix

[Mike Witt]

I’m just trying to get some information on this. If I understand things correctly, the threading problem is a known bug. But I’ve been unable to find anything in trac that is clearly a bug report (maybe I’m not searching right). I would appreciate some clarification of just what the underlying problem is, and what track ticket(s) are pertinent, if anyone would be so kind as to provide that.

[Robin W]

https://bbpress.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/3327

is the only one I know of

[Mike Witt]

Holy cow! That’s exactly what I was looking for, and appears to explain why I never see this bug as an admin. I guess the problem was that I was searching trac for “threading” and didn’t include variants like “threaded.” Duhh! Thank you so much (once again) @robin-w.