Will the bugs be sorted Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Australian RR Forums » General Discussion » Threads to 2015 » Will the bugs be sorted « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Treacy
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 06:46:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I am rarely known to be critical of this site, but now this site simply does not function anymore. The dates are quoted in US speak (5-28-03 means 28 May 2003) and the sorting is correspondingly randomised. If I ask for today's messages, up come messages from 2001. I am all in favour of progress, but at least for me this roll-out has failed entirely. I think we should request that we return to the old format until the new site functions properly.

Am I alone with these effects ?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bill Coburn
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 08:11:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Must say I agree. I tried to get back to our rear suspension exchange and initially simply could not find it. And I agree with the date problem, I have always had trouble with the MM/DD/YY format even when I lived there! One other thing that has nothing to do with the software is that there is very good reference material here and as it grows it must be getting more and more difficult to find. This is particularly the case when threads 'wander'. We start off with fitting a new washer to the radiator filler on a Dawn and eventually get into detailed chemical analogies of the cooling system. I don't know the answer to this. But as to the advantages of this new version of the software I must confess they escape me so far.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

RROCA Web Site Administrator
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 10:15:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I'm sorry to hear of these problems, and disappointed that I was not made aware of them sooner.

* The date formats are now in the form more familiar to Australians.

* I tried "Today's Messages" and that's what I got; in order. I had to click on the "+" box to open the tree, granted, but it nonetheless passes my test for functionality.

* I searched for "rear suspension" and the correct page appeared at the top of the list.

* The branching of threads as they grow can be a difficult problem to solve, as it needs a combination of technical and social manipulations. I'll look into enabling sub-threads in the busier topic threads and see if that helps.

* The upgrade of the forum software was necessary for two reasons: it was an older version that was no longer supported, and if/when we buy the "Pro" version it will derive from this version anyway. I thought it wise to have it in place well before the Federal Council meeting in April. Naturally there are going to be a few bugs as well as people simply unhappy with the change, but it had to happen sooner or later.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Treacy
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 10:56:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I'm sorry to hear of these problems, and disappointed that I was not made aware of them sooner.

<< we are a patinent bunch.

* The date formats are now in the form more familiar to Australians.

<< untrue. Heavens, I am Australian by the way. My recent Oz tax invoice is not like that, nor are my Oz, Swiss or German tax and bank statementes. 28 May 2003 is still clear around the world, as is 28. May 2003 and we host a public INTERnet forum. Not seriously, but why not use the more old European 03-05-28, which was supposed to be the internationally and IT so-called standard nowadays (heaviest identifier -year followed by descendinly lesser importantant identifiers montha and day) for May 28 this year.

* I tried "Today's Messages" and that's what I got; in order. I had to click on the "+" box to open the tree, granted, but it nonetheless passes my test for functionality.

<<Click, click click, how many clicks do we need, but it doesn't work.

* I searched for "rear suspension" and the correct page appeared at the top of the list.

<< Exactly

* The branching of threads as they grow can be a difficult problem to solve, as it needs a combination of technical and social manipulations. I'll look into enabling sub-threads in the busier topic threads and see if that helps.

<< but it doesn't work at all now

* The upgrade of the forum software was necessary for two reasons: it was an older version that was no longer supported, and if/when we buy the "Pro" version it will derive from this version anyway. I thought it wise to have it in place well before the Federal Council meeting in April. Naturally there are going to be a few bugs as well as people simply unhappy with the change, but it had to happen sooner or later

<< the sooner the better for the better, but not to stop the system in its tracks

Again, please accept this as constructtive feedback. Surprisingly, the RREC has just updated its site too. There is a general revolt there too as it has lost most of its functionality also.

Ohoh-must go back to a beautiful '54 Silver Dawn with a cracked piston.

RT.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jim Bettison
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 15:09:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I'm a member of both RROC(A) (the Oz one) and RREC. I check both the forums very regularly; my main interest is technical. In this regard I think that the old RROC(A) forum was (subjectively) better; easier to consult and had postings of (mainly) more depth. The RREC tended to local issues, I thought.
Certainly, the necessity for membership of RREC as prerequisite to entry to their forum did not, I thought, serve them as well as the Oz practice of keeping the forum open - and I found that this was also the view of some half-dozen or so RREC members who I spoke to about this last October. It seems to be reflected also by two or three US members of RREC who are regular correspondents. Not an overwhelming comment, but interesting "straws in the wind". It leads to my plea to have, or keep, these as "open" forums: I think that RROC(A) - and our forum - benefit from access by interested and competent people, who should be encouraged, wherever they are found. A club membership doesn't bestow such qualities. (I'm also conscious that open forums probably increase the Webmaster's load, and on top of what they already do, they are surely candidates for some sort of medal.)
Interesting that both the RREC and RROC(A) forums are changing structure at the same time. I really don't have enough experience of the new format(s) to feel that I can make (hopefully) helpful comments on either - yet. I have, by the way, noticed that at least one old posting was wrongly attributed to me in the new RROC(A) forum.
Good luck and good work. Jim B.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

RROCA Web Site Administrator
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 16:13:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I'm sorry, but I'm no clearer as to the problems you're encountering with the upgrade.

It all looks fine to me: I'm professionally used to critical upgrades of running systems (we're talking Internet banking sites here!) and my PIV ("Post Installation Verification") passed all my criteria successfully. Maybe I just don't use the forum the way others do...

Would those who have issues please contact me directly? I need detailed descriptions of what you believe isn't working and what you think just isn't right. I'm keen to work with you to sort out the problems so that everyone is happy with the forum.

If the problem's with the current interface, there is an option to revert to the "Traditional" format. But the back-end engine will still be Version 4, so actual behaviour will not change, if that's where the problems originate.

Or I can fully restore Version 3; in the process we will lose all postings since the upgrade. For this and previously stated reasons I am reluctant to take such action.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

RROCA Web Site Administrator
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 16:22:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Date Formats

Which shall it be? Left-ascending (dd-mm-yy) or right-ascending (yy-mm-dd)? Mathematically the latter is most appropriate, but the former is most commonly used.

Should we use numbers (2), roman numerals (II) or words (Feb) for months?

I'm not sure I can do roman numerals, but the date layout can be modified to suit whatever else we may decide upon. There are long, short and brief date formats, which appear at different levels of the forum.}}}

BTW, do you like the formatting buttons on the new posting page? Just one of Version 4's advantages.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Treacy
Posted on Saturday, 15 February, 2003 - 20:02:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Hi there,

I don't envy jour job here, and I am trying to be constructive.

Please accept my hearty compliments ! Being an industry guy relying on an extensive IT network I experience and don't complain about regular rollout glitches often.

Dates.

This is a universal problem. Yesterday I received a letter for a customer saying "on 01-02-03 we met concerning..." Being in an international company, the first thing I had to do was ring abroad and ask whether that was Jan, Beb or March in 2001, 2002, 2003. Perhaps that triggered my hasty posting.

Suggestions:

. a one-click way of seeing all recent postings of all categories from most recent to least

. I recommend that the dates be formatted "22 Jan 2002" as it is unambiguous.

Note: although European standards are not dd-mm-yyy, most German and Swiss authorities and banks have switched back to dd-mm-yyyy after a few years of heavy confusion and inconvenience to all, but they do explicitly show the format wherever you must fill out a date. Babies were being forced to retire; 35 year olds were too young to apply for a credit card and so on, hence the switch.

Let's bounce this around a bit. The trouble now is that the sorting doesn't work on my end (Compaq Armada laptop), and finding new messages involves opening a bunch of folders and looking for a "new" tag. I am afraid that people may find it too time consuming and abandon the site.

Kind regards,

Richard Treacy.