We should build a wiki

[MikiHeart]

I'm thinking that it could be a very good idea to build a wiki, or have an addon for vbulletin that creates a Wiki.

Something that we can all edit and add to, but have moderators approve edits (So we don't have any trolls come in and take over).

Then we can add our mods, guides, tips, and it's all in one easy place for people to get to.

[rickasawr]

I would like to see this happen!

As a new user of the script, a wiki would be very informative and is easier navigating than thread posts on forums for information.

[Kyttias]

I vote no. There are many versions of the script, far less than a dozen mods for each, and users would have to sign up for the wiki to ask questions on a separate discussion page. And as a mod maker, I would have to post and answer questions in two locations and then refer people who ask questions to the opposite site where the same question may have already been asked, rather than repeat myself.

There is already a perfectly convenient category on this site for mods (which are even conveniently organized by version). I don't see bulletin board software with a wiki for mods. Or any content management system, really. Save wikis for games and tv shows.

What we need is documentation and a github repository, as these are appropriate resource outlets for code. I don't want to see a wiki until those two are 100% done.

[MikiHeart]

There are all kinds of mods for vbulletin, including a wiki. So doesn't have to be a separate place. I think it's better than the forums, because the forums are all over the place.

The mods section is very unorganized. There are people asking for help, there are mods that have been removed, and mods that aren't updated.

The wiki would also include the full documentation. Right now, everything is all over the place and you have to search through everything to find what is useful and what is not. Where an updated and managed wiki would be a lot better.

[IntoRain]

If the code was fully documented, documentation would be automatically made with specific tools like doxygen (yes, it generates its own wiki). I think it's more useful to document the classes and functions directly, instead of using a wiki

[Hall of Famer]

Well the next major version will have documentation for each class, property and method. Mys v1.3.x does not have documentation though, and I do not plan to add one in future. I think a wiki sounds good, you may research on mediawiki or wikia. Let me know which one you like better.

[rickasawr]

After seeing the idea for documentation, i agree that there should be a documentation instead of a wiki because im having trouble figuring out everything about the script. A documentation would be very usefull and very help, i hope to see one in the future!

[Kyttias]

I'm trying to build some sort of documentation here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tHXa6bdAOchgjfftyLI3tnYzw_AJDOSR-4AsAU8Y2Wg/edit), but mostly for my own reference, and it's far from done. ^^;

[MikiHeart]

I don't know much about documentation, I just know that most ones I've seen are just simple html pages.

Also HoF, any timeline for the next version? I know you were planning to release it last year but life always gets in the way of things (Damn life and living and stuff lol)

rickasawr: Have a look at Kyttias' documentation, it's looking really good.

[IntoRain]

Basically you just need to comment the functions and classes with the appropriate comment blocks and it generates a wiki with call graphs and cross references and everything.
Quoting a post I made previously about this:

Can I suggest doxygen-style comments for the classes and functions? Doxygen automatically generates a wiki thing (.html) with information on all classes and functions from just comments, making it easier in my opinion for us to search for stuff. I know it kinda sucks to comment everything, but since you will be changing the code a lot and since some of the older functions and core classes are already commented, I thought I'd suggest doxygen-style comments: http://www.doxygen.nl/docblocks.html

The generated .html pages look awesome:

http://i.imgur.com/xwg2V9c.png (example of a function description (detailed) - it has the call graph and the caller graph!)

http://i.imgur.com/O8nIDdC.png (example of a class list, it shows undetailed member functions with the details at the end of the page - it has a search function! it also shows class hierarchy, files, etc!)

(please ignore the fact I used both C-style and Java-style code standards for the function names lol it's messy I know)

You can customize the wiki colors and structure as well, I just didn't lose much time with it.

I say yes to creating a wiki for user guides like Kyttias' though.

[Hall of Famer]

I don't know much about documentation, I just know that most ones I've seen are just simple html pages.

Also HoF, any timeline for the next version? I know you were planning to release it last year but life always gets in the way of things (Damn life and living and stuff lol)

rickasawr: Have a look at Kyttias' documentation, it's looking really good.

I cannot give a precise time of when the next version will be released, but it should be this year. If I get a job soon and life starts to click, it can be in the summer, otherwise it will be later. I think the main issue right now is that the development stage of the script is a bit mysterious to you all at this point, it will change soon and in about a month or two I will begin posting updates on the new features implemented for the new version so waiting will not be as boring as it is now.

The fact is that the new version ends up being almost a complete rewrite of the older version, it really feels like version 2.0 rather than 1.4. But I guess you understand why this is necessary coming from the old Rusnak adoptables era. The old code BMR wrote was hard to extend and maintain, so at some point I will have to do this anyway.

[MikiHeart]

Thank you for explaining IntoRain

HoF: Thank you. I understand completely. Are database fields staying the same so that we can upgrade at least the base of our sites? (I know we'll have to rewrite mods and stuff)

[Hall of Famer]

Well the database fields are completely different, you can have a look at the screenshot I took from phpmyadmin for Mys v1.4.0 dev for some insights. Note there will be even more tables to store some settings for certain features, although these can also appear as flat files in .xml format:
http://oi61.tinypic.com/ofdkk6.jpg


However, this does not mean upgrading database will not be possible. There will be mapping for old Mysidia database tables/fields to new Mysidia database tables/fields. It can be complex, but its doable and easily automated. I will release a beta version without upgrader at first prior to the official stable release, during this two weeks beta testing phase I will try to design an upgrader for database.

[Glow]

The next version is really exciting! <3

And also, will there be a wiki implemented then?

[Hall of Famer]

Well you can build a wiki if you want to, for Mys v1.3.x it can be very useful. For Mys v1.4.x though, the script will come with rich documentation for each functionality, so there will be little need for full-fledged wiki pages.

[MikiHeart]

Oh okay.

it looks extremely feature rich. I like that. Including giving the users the ability to block people. Which I think is a very good idea.

I may instead use my time to practice coding with v1.3.x, so that when v1.4.x comes out, my knowledge will have increased and then build off of that script.

Because just by looking at the database I feel that v1.3.x will be shadowed by v1.4.x

[Kyttias]

Indeed! I'm getting my concepts down in 1.3.x with focus on design over functionality. I feel a lot of it will be transferable - but much of it will have to be done manually.

Transferring users and pets however? Might be nigh impossible.

[Glow]

It is possible to like save all your modified codes into a file, then reinstall the newest version of Mysidia before updating all your modified codes maybe? XD And then adding back content, that is, if your site has not open to public...

[MikiHeart]

Glow: Everything custom coded would need to be recoded to work with the new version.

[Glow]

Oh sorry, I'm kind of not really totally understanding whats going on haha thanks XD

[Kyttias]

While the logic of custom codes may stay sound, variable names, file locations, file names, and the method of interacting with the database may be changing. If its really such a complete overhaul, I imagine class and function names may be modified, too.

I'm looking forward to clans. I was hoping to get some factions into my site, if its what I think it is...

[Kesstryl]

So good to hear news on the new version! I've actually put off my pet site to wait for this script to get updated and upgraded because of all the major changes going into it. I have concept art and some finished line art, but honestly I've been focusing on making a rpg multiplayer type game in the meantime to sharpen my programming skills. That has put my pet site on the back burner, but the point is I'm learning how to program right now which will make me a better game owner in the long run. Can't wait to see the next version!