I would really like to see code moved into partial classes.

This takes a different direction from what is being talked about, hope you don’t mind. Down to basics, real basic!

A problem with open source is that everyone writes code sending his or her program in a different direction. I guess that’s also the good part, flexibility! With all the modifications to code, I can see where a simple install routine could be difficult.

None the less, you almost need to be an expert programmer to install Yaf or even to upgrade versions. I am not even almost an expert programmer, and there are many more like me using Yaf. There is a real need for an install and update program.

Maybe a core version could be made that would be easily updateable. For those who wish to modify code, they can. For those, like me, who can’t code, we download the program and press install! I know it can’t be just that easy, but it doesn’t have to be impossible to those of us who don’t code.

In short, we need an install and update program!

Thanks for the work each of you have done. It is a great program!

---

I would like to be able to link to different language versions of a forum.
For example by switching the UI language via an URL parameter for guest users.

How about adding a "Comment" feature. Like Stackoverflow. People don't need to post a full reply if they consider it a small question/comment about a post. Is anyone interested to see this feature?

---

How about adding a "Comment" feature. Like Stackoverflow. People don't need to post a full reply if they consider it a small question/comment about a post. Is anyone interested to see this feature?

Hehe... not in v1.9.5 😉

Lol, How about further releases? I mean what do you say about the idea?

---

Lol, How about further releases? I mean what do you say about the idea?

Sure... that would be a great feature for v2.0.

Grrreato!
P.S. This could have been added as a comment! 😁

---

Could be a space saver for me... Always have 5-10 members who have to say "Welcome xxxxx" when a new user posts a first post and clutter up the topic which usually is a question about something... Kinda like the idea...

Not a "need", rather "nice to have"...

---

Please provide constructive ideas -- what would you like to see.
* Custom NET Authentication Provider Support

I'm not sure if this bug is related to the item above. I'm using IE8 in Win7/64Pro. Very often I keep my installation of forum in the browser window opened. As soon as the session expires and I click some button it shows me that I need to login... and shows the continue... link. Logically it should change the main menu from Logout to Login since I'm already out.

Also when I logout and login again keeping the same browser window very often I'm able to keep working, but as soon as I want to open the Forum Setup and click Admin => Host Administration... Nothing happens. The window shakes, but I can't open the Host Administration Items. If I logout again and then login it starts working as it supposed to. Is it a bug in Windows Authentication System or in the app?

---

Please provide constructive ideas -- what would you like to see.
* Full conversion to NET v2.0. This means:
* Using Themes System
* Code being moving into partial classes
* More .NET v2.0 specific niceties maybe

My resources are limited and I don’t even have an install of VS 2003 anymore to work on NET v1.1. So development on my end is already moving to a YAF for v2.0 only. But, I have no problem with someone coming on board and keeping the NET v1.1 of YAF in sync – it’s just that I’m not going to do it.

Honestly I'd prefer the whole solution to be compiled for .NET 4.0 because not only me, but I know that many people create their own projects with the latest version of .NET and they want to use the forum as a control on their pages. This is my dream as well. But, instead of recompiling the source codes and searching for mistakes that we unable to figure out, we'd better get the binary archives for 4.0, replace the ones for 2.0 and add the references in our solutions right away. In this case many people would be happier and we all would get the same binary files so that we'll be able to discuss them regardless of possible mistakes that we added after converting and recompiling the source codes from 2.0 to 4.0. I saw that someone wrote that he simply replaced the project binary files from 2.0 to 4.0, but where did he get these files from? I'm sorry, maybe I missed that, but I didn't see an official URL for 4.0 version. And the original post in this thread confirms that the development is to be done for 2.0.

---

Nowadays, with ASP.NET 2,0 and the system of providers, the Web applications are more compatible.
Nevertheless, the applications are independent, although they can share users, roles, etc.

YAF is an application that works very well alone, but integration with other applications (DNN for example) is limited and is necessary to prepare it (to create integration modules).

A change of architecture, that could not be very expensive, could obtain the use of YAF in any application.

This change would be simply to divide the present application in two projects:

:!: One would be a library of controls, with the forum core and all its functionality.
:!: The second would be a project Web, a simple layer of presentation, that uses the controls and library of the YAF core.

This way, YAF working alone, would be as present and the motor of YAF could be used in any application very easily.

The version of .NET is critical for using it as control. I'm usign VS2010 with the latest 4.0 and it has tons of features comparing to the previous frameworks. But, as I just posted in a previous one, the main project is 2.0. It can be used as a control, but only with .NET 2.0.

---

I actually started working on this a while ago -- sort of board settings override for host settings. Will put it on the list.

Good to know! But what about my idea about URL sensitive settings? Say, I'm having a forum with many different states. It would be extremely convenient if we could start the same forum with some parameter to show only the set of forums related to the appropriate state or country. The URL keys should be configurable of course, and the admin should be able to set a new key or correct the existing one to bind the appropriate forums and categories to it and hide all others. Isn't that a good idea? In this case we can keep working with the same forum installation and never create tons of different forums bothering with different accounts, settings, etc. Once it's done the hidden categories and forums can appear if the user wants them to appear. Say, the forum starts with the appropriate set of categories and forums visible for the user that used the appropriate URL. But once the user is logged in hw should be able to click a button to "restore" all the hidden items available for him, or to hide them again to make the forum more flexible, lighter and easier for reading/posting.

---

Maybe you should consider to move source code to Codeplex.com?

Kind regards from Poland

Honestly I prefere and like Vault Source Gear. They provide their solution for a single developer for free. Here is the link:

http://www.sourcegear.com/vault/ 

I'm pretty sure it is discussible with the Vault Team since YAF if the opensource and freeware project. I guess they can grant a special license to help develop this project. At the same time we, as developers, could use the source codes shared with Vault Source Gear and even post our own corretions. Or at least it can be done read-only for the rest of the world and we should be able to track all the changes right away to send the correction in email messages as attachments and our suggestions.

I began using Vault Source-Off-Site over 10 years ago, then I switched to Vault Source Gear. Also keep in mind that the latest version of this system have the bug tracking features. Isn't that excellent? it can help to automate the whole process and let us participate in the project as well. I'm a developer, but I can't do that right now for some obvious reasons. We'll be always behind the main train because we're not tracking the latest code. So it's almost impossible to easily merge the changes that we'd like to add.

Btw, authorized Internet developers can get a special login from the main developer to be able to upload the changes, all others should get it as Read-Only with the ability to post changed somehow to get them approved and merged.

Finally, I suspect that Vault is located in Germany, so it will be easy for the local guys to contact them directly on the phone to discuss the details.

---

The next idea should include mvc 3 razor