sozzled wrote: It is clear from looking at GitHub #3687 that this is a bug. At the time of writing #3687 is classed as a bug and that was why I wrote earlier that this topic should be moved to a different category.

I stand corrected. 5 minutes after writing this, rich changed the classification of the issue to "feature".

In spite of this, I don't think it changes my assessment of what this topic is discussing and it hasn't helped GizChris one bit by debating the matter. I think most people would agree that this matter is a significant shortcoming in Crypsis—for those who want to use module positions—and something that should be addressed quickly.

@GizChris: This shortcoming with the module position will not be fixed in K 4.0 Crypsis. End of story, I think.

Let me see if I understand 810 correctly:

810 wrote: [The] bug ... was the module [position that didn't appear in K 4.0 Crypsis. We] have fixed that in the [latest/K 4.0.10] version.

This is what I understand you to have written.

810 wrote: What Rich found has nothing to do with a bug/issue but a feature request.

Well, I know that you and I sometimes disagree about the definition of a bug (or defect or "issue") but I don't think this makes people happy to read that, on the one hand, K 4.0 allows module positions (in the form of kunena_msg_n) to accommodate placement of modules at every nth message for Blue Eagle but does not allow it similarly for those who use Crypsis.

Therefore, by saying that people need to "customise their Kunena template" (without providing any tutorial or documentation about the procedure and in the knowledge that these "customisations" will inevitably fail in future when the internal structures in Kunena are changed ) I don't agree with your assessment that this module position issue is not a defect as you have tried to characterise it.

It is clear from looking at GitHub #3687 that this is a bug. At the time of writing #3687 is classed as a bug and that was why I wrote earlier that this topic should be moved to a different category.

All very confusing. It doesn't inspire confidence if people cannot use Kunena in a "similar" kind of manner whether they use Crypsis or Blue Eagle. Leaving that aside, to summarise what you've written: if you want to use Kunena to place modules after every nth message posted (relative to the top of the page) use Blue Eagle; this feature is not supported in Crypsis. Crypsis allows the use of module positions at the nth absolute position (relative to the first message posted in a topic) but does not repeat if a topic spans more than one page.

If I may also summarise my understanding of what has been written, the ability to use relative module positions in Crypsis—in a similar way to how things have worked with the older (Blue Eagle) template dating all the way back to K 1.6—is considered by the development team to be a feature request.

GizChris wrote: I stumbled upon another issue with Crypsis. Uploads do not work anymore with it. If I try to upload something it just says "upload failed". Permissions are set correctly (755) and it works flawlessly when I switch back to Blue Eagle.

810 wrote: this is a bug, we are still looking for a fix.

I am not sure which "bug" 810 is talking about but, perhaps, he means >>> this <<<?

rich found a defect in the way that Kunena handles module positions. Until rich reported this problem, I was not aware of an item in GitHub that refers to it. 810 wrote about a "bug". I assume that he's referring to a problem with uploads.

It looks like this topic discusses two separate problems and it's difficult to follow the progress in resolving two different problems if they're mixed together. I suggest that the subject of the topic in the first post be changed to refer only to the module positions and let's stay on-topic with that issue. The question about the upload problem is better discussed elsewhere.

It would be good if one of the developers can provide an update on the situation with the "failed upload" problem (810 wrote that it's an "old Joomla bug") and how it's being addressed.

In any event, it is clear that this is not just a general "how to" question. We're talking about a defect (or two) and the topic should be moved to the appropriate category.

This topic was originally posted in the K 4.0 General Questions category.

rich wrote: Before this fix (sic) the module was displayed by post ID. Now it is the absolute message number in a topic. But it should be message number per page.
Example kunena_msg_1 : The module will displayed only after the first message in a topic. If you go to page 2 there is nothing.
I will create a issue for it.

If people would like to follow the progress on this issue, they can go >>> here <<<

It seems that this is actually a defect of K 4.0 Crypsis. It may be better to move this topic to the Kunena Support (reporting defects) category, yes?

ruud wrote: Kunena discuss depends heavily on Joomla content (articles and categories).

Kunena Discuss works exclusively with the core Joomla content component (com_content).

For more of my thoughts about using Kunena Discuss with non Joomla-core components (e.g. article management, media galleries, etc.), see >>> here <<<.

men1079 wrote: I think Kunena developers can do plugin to K2 ...

Perhaps ... but I doubt it. There simply is no profitability in doing this; there's no money to be made by writing, distributing and maintaining a plugin for free. If it were profitable to do this—to write, distribute and maintain a form of Kunena Discuss that interoperated with K2, EasyBlog, DocMan or other Joomla extensions—the I think this would have been done a long time ago.

The facts are these:

1) No-one has developed and is maintaining a commenting feature that operates with K2 (or with EasyBlog, Docman, or any of a dozen or more other blogging components written for Joomla ) and Kunena.

2) No-one has requested a freelance developer to write an extension based on Kunena Discuss that would operate with alternative Joomla content-authoring components. If people were really keen to have someone develop a plugin that worked like Kunena Discuss, then I'm sure they could make their own arrangements to pay someone for their time and expertise to develop this kind of software.

3) There is little incentive these days for people to write, offer for sale and continue to maintain software, where those products rely on other developers whose future plans are unknown. As people would be well-aware, independently-written software (e.g. third-party templates, plugins and modules written for Kunena) have become more difficult to locate; it has also become more difficult to locate people (outside the Kunena team) who are prepared to invest their time in producing software that operates with Kunena. Therefore, when you suggest that the developers "can do" a plugin for K2, I do not know where your evidence is for making this suggestion.

4) Have you asked the developers of JComments if they're interested in writing a plugin for their component that works with Kunena?

I can only say "good luck" to people who ask if a variant of Kunena Discuss can be made to work with alternatives to the core Joomla content component. In the four years since Kunena Discuss has been available, no-one (to my knowledge) has written a plugin that allows website users to make comments on non "Joomla-authored" articles, that channels these comments into the Kunena forum and displays the comments together with the article.

It hasn't been done (in over four years) and I have grave doubts that it will ever be done ... unless someone believes they can make a profit from doing it.

Spam and Kunena: this is hot topic. In earlier times, the moderators here would collect/merge these questions into one centrally-located place so that it would be easier for people to view the different ideas and thoughts that people had on this subject. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the moderators have abandoned the practice of merging/moving or "stickying" hot topic issues posted on this forum.

As a suggestion, if you cannot find information on this forum that helps you deal with your problems, you might like to use Google to search for information about "How to stop spam in Kunena forum" .

In connection with issues that this site has with spam, see the reply >>> here <<<

men1079 wrote: Hello. I want to use K2 componet for site content. How can i use kunena discuss plugin for comment K2 content?

No.

This question has been asked and answered a dozen or more times on this forum.

Kunena Discuss only works with Joomla articles; it does not with K2 things. Please talk to the K2 developers to ask them whether they're interesting in developing a plugin that will work with the Kunena forum component.

810 wrote: if you set the settings on kunena, Then try to disable the recaptcha plugin.

I do not think this is a wise suggestion. There may be other reasons for using the Joomla CAPTCHA plugin (e.g. user registration, other Joomla extensions that utilise the Joomla CAPTCHA plugin) if site owners want to use Google reCAPTCHA V 2.0.

For the time being, site owners who want to use Google reCAPTCHA V 2.0 with Kunena V 4.0 are required to use Crypsis. Site owners cannot use Google reCAPTCHA V 2.0 with K 4.0 Blue Eagle but they can use Google reCAPTCHA V 2.0 for other things in Joomla if they wish; therefore there is no need to disable the plugin.

I do not know if this will help you but you could try the technique described >>> here <<<

chiripas wrote: Hi fxstein ...

fxstein has not been active in this forum for several years.

W13ear wrote: Where and how do I make it possible that new users are automatically added to receive notifications for new posts in an entire category and all sub-categories?

You should be aware that it may be illegal to force new users to receive notification of new messages posted on your forum unless they have formally agreed that (a) they will "automatically" be subscibed and (b) they have the means to unsubscribe if they do not wish to receive emails about new posts.

The Joomla CAPTCHA plugin does not work with K 4.0 Blue Eagle. It's as simple as that. The Joomla CAPTCHA plugin settings (to allow you to use Google's reCAPTCHA V 2.0 ) only work with K 4.0 Crypsis. K 4.0 Blue Eagle only "supports" Google reCAPTCHA V 1.0 through the K 4.0 configuration settings. The K 4.0 Crypsis template uses the Joomla CAPTCHA plugin settings.

We have had this discussion before . The Kunena developers have no intention of supporting Google reCAPTCHA V 2.0 for the Blue Eagle template.

In summary: use the Kunena configuration settings if you want to use CAPTCHA for Blue Eagle; use the Joomla plugin settings if you want to use CAPTCHA for Crypsis.

I hope this helps to explain the current situation.

You could add the following lines to your Gantry 5 custom CSS file:

See how that goes.

I think there is a spelling mistake in the description of the issue. The issue is referred to as fixing an error "on none Kunena pages". I think you mean "non-Kunena components": none Kunena implies [to me] "nothing wrong with the Kunena component"; non-Kunena implies [to an English speaking person] "nothing that would affect the Kunena component". Is that what you mean?

If you mean that there is nothing wrong (or broken) with Kunena, it's difficult to understand why 38 files were changed, involving the replacement of 1,553 lines of code with additional code. Do you have any idea when (i.e. what version) changes to Kunena may have created the problem? Which "modules" (outside of Kunena), that are "loaded [with] the Kunena view", are involved that would reproduce this problem?

For your benefit, 810, there is a difference (in English) between "none" and "non". Thanks.