Search Results (Searched for: )

18 Jun 2016 00:07 - 18 Jun 2016 00:33
This topic is to assist people who may be wondering about K 5.0 and what benefits it provides over those who use K 4.0. I am using the information posted by the developers together with some topics posted on this forum as the basis for the making my overall assessment.

What is Kunena version 5.0?

K 5.0 is an an extension package (comprising a component and several plugins) developed for J! 3.5. That is, K 5.0 requires J! 3.5 in order for it to be installed. Put another way, K 5.0 cannot be installed on Joomla versions before J! 3.5.0 .

K 4.0.x, on the other hand, can be installed on J! 2.5 and J! 3.x. This may be important to people who are still using J! 2.5[1] . There is limited support for K 4.0 from the development team for people who use J! 2.5 websites.

Support for PHP 7

While it is important for some users[2] , K 5.0 supports PHP 7 as well as PHP 5, whereas K 4.0 cannot operate in PHP 7 environments. With the take-up of PHP 7 confined to around 5% of all Joomla users, it will probably take some time before PHP 7 to gain widespread use.

One of the claimed benefits of PHP 7 is that code is executed two or three times faster. Again, this may be a factor where people operate large websites and performance is a consideration. For most people running small sites, this is probably nothing they will be concerned about (or interested in) unless they are involved in software development as their core business or if they have other Joomla extensions installed that are totally dependent on PHP 7 support.

Availability of third-party templates

At the time of writing, with K 5.0 still in pre-production (i.e. release candidate) phase, there are no third-party templates for this version of Kunena.

There are a range of third-party template options for K 4.0 apart from the two that are included in the installation kit (viz. Crypsis and Blue Eagle). It has only been in the last couple of weeks that third-party template options for K 4.0, other than those based on the Blue Eagle version, became available based on the HMCV model[3] .

The obvious benefit in using K 5.0 is for those who have never used Kunena before and those people who are already using Crypsis[4] .

New features

K 5.0 has a few new features. Perhaps, more importantly, however, is the fact that a number of current defects with K 4.0 have been attended to by the developers and, although it has not been publicly stated anywhere, K 4.0 looks certain to reach end-of-life within a fairly short space of time.

Some of the new features include a "star-rating" system. The rating system is purely indicative, of course, and local within the confines of the website; that is, it has no microdata value as far as search engines are concerned.

Apart from the star-rating feature, K 5.0 is supposed to "integrate" with other Joomla extensions such as Easy Social, Easy Profile, Easy Blog, Altauserpoints, Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Whatsapp, Instagram and Sound Cloud.

Better reliability

I cannot comment on the reliability of K 5.0 (or whether it has fewer bugs than K 4.0) until a stable version is available and becomes fully supported by the team. Currently K 5.0 is in "release candidate" phase.

This summarises the benefits of K 5.0 over K 4.0. Other people can contribute (or argue/debate what I've written) as they choose.

Cheers
_________
Notes:
[1] J! 2.5 has been at end-of-life since 31-Dec-2014 . This does not affect me personally because I do not have any J! 2.5 websites at the moment. This fact does affect the owners of this website which, at the time of writing, is based on J! 2.5.
[2] PHP 7 is mainly used in hosted enviroments where the site developer has the option to choose different versions of PHP (e.g VPS, localhost/PC-hosted environments and the like). Until or unless my own webhost forces me to adopt PHP 7 I am content to remain with PHP 5.
[3] The first HMVC-based third-party template that I saw announced was from JoomForest . Presumably, other developers may have commenced writing their own versions also.
[4] Based on the configuration reports submitted to this forum, less than 5% of people reporting problems with K 4.0 are using Crypsis.
17 Jun 2016 09:53 - 17 Jun 2016 11:10
Replied by sozzled on topic H1 Titles in Kunena!

Josh wrote: As of K5 I've actually been pretty impressed with Crypsis.

All fairly true, I guess. I'm waiting for K 5.0 to stabilise before I use it.

This topic, however, is in the K 4.0 General Questions category and it relates to K 4.0. The UI/UX in K 5.0 is not dissimilar, by the way, and I think that point may have been overlooked. Many of the issues you refer to in your assessment of K 5.0 are equally valid as far as K 4.0 is concerned.

=== off-topic ===
There have been rumours about overhauling K.org for a long time. The latest I heard is that the new site design bears no resemblance to what you may have seen/heard 8 months ago. There has already been a shift in perception about Kunena in the past 18 months, but it's probably not we've been hoping for; it's a different subject for a different forum. ;)
=== end off-topic ===


Back on topic, if there is a change required to convert H3s to H1s (or H2s), the question remains whether this will be done in a future version of K 4.0? This also begs the question whether there will even be any future releases after K 4.0.11.
17 Jun 2016 09:44
Thank you for your concern, Josh. I wonder why the developers haven't considered it. We shall see. Will it be fixed in K 4.0? That's a completely different question. :whistle:
17 Jun 2016 06:22 - 17 Jun 2016 06:25
Replied by sozzled on topic H1 Titles in Kunena!

Josh wrote: Excellent catch! I see Blue Eagle used an H1 tag for the title (which is the best way to go).

This is really important. It's probably one of the biggest issues that's never been actually understood before, because the place where Kunena is developed does not use Crypsis!

I have stayed clear of K 5.0 topics because I can see there is much work to be done before K 5.0 is stable. I am commenting here because this is a K 4.0 matter and I'm concerned that it—as will the rest of the community who depend on K 4.0 for their businesses—will be forgotten.

For three years now it's been difficult to see how Crypsis actually works in real life without installing it on our own sites. Over this time the developers have been trying to market the new template and they've been unsuccessful; that's not being unkind, that's just stating a fact.

The simple point is this: Blue Eagle (and third-party templates derived from it), for all the "bad things" that it incorporates, is used by 95% of all Kunena users. Why is that the case? It's because Crypsis is almost unknown outside of the 5% of people who are using it. It's because new users of Kunena see Blue Eagle on the developers' site and they'll believe that's what they should use, too. And, if they don't like what they see, they'll use a third-party template (and all of those are based on Blue Eagle).

The new-found interest in Crypsis is simply because of the interest in K 5.0.

I understand that some people will disagree with my comments but I would like us to have a serious discussion about the problems we see in K 4.0 Crypsis: problems, I feel, will never be addressed. The Crypsis template, in its current form, is virtually unusable in a busy forum. Notice that I started a topic earlier today about one of those problems. I would be surprised if anything I write about K 4.0 gets much attention these days.

K 4.0 Crypsis uses H3 tags. That's a fact. It's not good for SEO and it's not good for our businesses.
16 Jun 2016 22:30

xristo wrote: Joomla v 3.4.7; PHP Version 5.4.16

Curious that you are using very old Joomla and PHP... possibly the reason why you're having problems. Have you considered updating to J! 3.5.1 and PHP 5.6?
16 Jun 2016 22:19
This topic has been discussed before in K 3.0: "There are no published categories in ." message . Same problem; same recommended solution.
16 Jun 2016 22:06 - 16 Jun 2016 22:26
I'm surprised no-one has detected this yet.

Look at the following screenshot that shows a number of topics posted in different categories on a forum:



As you will see, on the Blue Eagle template, the category names are displayed. On the Crypsis template, the category names are missing.

In a busy forum, where it's important to understand the subject of a topic in its proper context (i.e. which category was it posted to), it's actually quite important to see the category name on the recent topics view. This is a problem with K 4.0 (and it may be a reason why people choose the Blue Eagle template instead of the Crypsis one).

Can this matter please be investigated and resolved before the release of K 5.0, please?
16 Jun 2016 21:41
Replied by sozzled on topic Top posters module
Thank you for your question about the Top Posters for Kunena module. It would be appreciated if you wrote a review about that module and posted it on the JED.

Just to be sure I understand your question, you would like a module that:
  1. lists the names of users (you can define how many names you want to display) who use your forum; and
  2. these users have not posted anything on your forum for, say, the last 90 (or 180 or n days - you define the period).

Is that what you would like? :)
16 Jun 2016 01:05
Replied by sozzled on topic Show Karma is still present

Josh wrote: I don't plan on using the feature personally.

I agree with you. I think most of us would never use this feature either (even this forum hasn't used it for over 5 years). B) I find it odd that the feature was removed in K 4.0 and, because the people at Joomlapolis were unhappy about it—it's returned like a zombie and it just doesn't seem to want to die.
16 Jun 2016 00:09
Replied by sozzled on topic Show Karma is still present

Josh wrote: Just had to see if the feature was still deprecated or not. B)

The feature was "deprecated" in K 4.0 — the feature doesn't exist in the Crypsis template but it does exist in the Blue Eagle template — and we're all aware of the risks associated with using "karma".

It appears the deprecated feature has returned—like a zombie (some things just never die)—to make it's way back into K 5.0. Sounds good? Oh well, c'est la vie!
15 Jun 2016 10:47 - 15 Jun 2016 10:48
Replied by sozzled on topic Placement of the icons
You make a few good points here. I wouldn't know if these are "bugs"; they are design features and, like you, I find some of these features a bit confusing and difficult for my users to use also. Most of these features are also in K 4.0 Crypsis template, too.

Therefore, it's partly a discussion about K 5.0 and it's also a general observation about Crypsis.

Perhaps, instead of this topic being in the K 5.0 Bugs category, it might be better if it was re-located to the General Feedback category? Just a thought. B)
13 Jun 2016 03:58 - 13 Jun 2016 04:01

Dacosta wrote: Could you let me know how to get the kunena report?

Watch the video vimeo.com/69818669
13 Jun 2016 03:29
Replied by sozzled on topic Karma description
A few points to make:

  • "karma" is a deprecated feature of K 4.0.x that only works with the Blue Eagle template
  • the feature is disabled by default on most websites
  • support for Blue Eagle templates will cease at the end of K 4.0
12 Jun 2016 23:15

rich wrote: This option is only for Crypsis available. With blue eagle you must hide subcategories via css.

Thanks for that information. I have added it to my list of differences between Crypsis and Blue Eagle. :)
11 Jun 2016 20:01

TomasFC wrote: It's important to mention that I have always used CB and I've never given users (I didn't know how) the option to modify their "canSubscribe" setting. In looking at the database, every user's setting for "canSubscribe" is "1". I've never changed this value.

This setting was applied as the result of changes made in K 4.0.5.

TomasFC wrote: Given this, with the changes in the new template, I have NO option in configuration settings to have the default setting for the checkbox unchecked, neither do the users. My choice is to have users subscribe to a topic, only when they make the effort to check the box. Most users are unaware of the checkbox when they reply to a topic. Should users on an individual basis want to have the subscription by default for every topic they reply to, I could enable that in the future, but it's never been an option so far.

I wrote about the impact of the changes >>> here <<<
Displaying 61 - 75 out of 20338 results.
Time to create page: 1.274 seconds