Joined: Dec 13, 2005 Posts: 5 Location: Cranwell, UK
Posted:
Sat Sep 23, 2006 4:42 pm
Well - GNA UNited made an announcement that they had bought Nuke 8 and were allowing people to download it (available >here<) so I thought - OK lets have a look
Downloaded and extracted it and had a look at the readme.... First impressions - not too bad - he has finally included a webinstaller....
A database needs to be in place first though - but there is no requirement to edit the config.php file. As long as the details are input correctly into the webinstaller the file gets edited for you on the fly during the install process.
Installer is pretty good - taking you step by step through the process.
Not had a chance to look into it properly though BUT - the d***ed WYSIWYG editor is still in place... will look into wether any security is present later tonite - but may well just go and install Sentinel for good measure.
Test site can be seen >here<
If ya want to have a play on someone elses hosting - let me know and i will create an admin account for you....
Personally, I wouldnt give it hosting space.
I have not noted any changes that help secure the editor and there are a number of bugs still there from the previous version.
Joined: Dec 13, 2005 Posts: 5 Location: Cranwell, UK
Posted:
Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:03 pm
Oh - believe me - it aint gonna be there long......
Sentinel kinda installed - don't seem to be tracking IP's though - used the core file edits per 7.9 - kind of... but at least it is being included and the blockers are set.
I poked around with it, and as usual it still has the same problems it always does. Patches are still well behind. Still has a ton of coding mistakes and problems. So typical FB mess.
Joined: Mar 06, 2004 Posts: 1140 Location: Manchester, NH USA
Posted:
Tue Oct 10, 2006 4:36 pm
First post in ... well... a year.
After toying this with this POS for an hour and seeing a few hundred of the bugs from the last 3 versions still in it, I decided not to waste any more time.
In terms of the WYSIWYG editor.... FB's version is still not secure, not even close to compliant and well.. not even setup right, but what should I (or anyone else) expect?
I won't go on to write a full-blown bitch column (despite my desire to do so), but rather will only comment that Nuke 8.0 (or should I say Nuke 7.7 - Alpha Version 4, as it is not stable enough to be called even BETA) is the same sad story, all over again. Bugs, bugs and more bugs, yet very few fixes despite the hundreds of hours put into that task by people who don't have the initials, "FB"; but rather who are ignored because... they can be.
I wish my first post in a year here at Raven's could have been positive, but alas FB has painted me back into that crappy-code corner again and since he still won't turn on forums on his own site, I can't add my complaints to the other 1000 people that would post them there.
Now on a positive note, if I could only figure out where Raven and the others are hiding Raven's new custom distro (yeah, the unreleased one).
I'm going to have some vacation time starting next week, so at least if I am going to play around with BETA software, I can play with something that isn't a smoldering pile of doggie doo-doo.
Comparison of the day....
What Raven calls BETA > What FB Calls Final
What Raven calls Alpha > What FB Calls Final
What Raven calls conceptual is still > What FB Calls Final.
In other words, I feel safer and more confident running Raven's alpha code even in a production environment than I would ever feel loading FB's "Final" version on a non-networked development box.
"And that's all I have to say about that"....
Steph
Joined: Aug 29, 2004 Posts: 7330 Location: Arizona
Posted:
Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:43 pm
To heck with RN, all we're doing is trying to get where Steph was a year ago... We could marry up what we've done with his work, as a Team, and have a rock-solid release of PHP-Nuke, fast, bug free, XHTML/HTML compliant, etc, etc, etc, and finally give the community what FB should have given them all along!
Joined: Mar 06, 2004 Posts: 1140 Location: Manchester, NH USA
Posted:
Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:01 pm
Alas, to whoever is moderating this forum; feel free to find a more appropriate place for the following post as I don't know where it really belongs, but most likely not here. Who knows?
montego wrote:
robsscanner, 8.0 already has a set of patches out.
This is in itself disturbing, but in a really "Nuke Developer Code Words" way.
I'm happy to see quite a few of the same folks still plugging away; however, I am a tad disappointed that so many of the major objectives (after yet another year) remain unachieved in the baseline and the prospects of core feature standardization and stabilization continue to look pretty grim.
While I half-heartedly (I'll explain that later) commend the work of the Nuke community in continuously patching and fixing bugs, this existence is unfortunately a circular issue forced by the author. The bottom line being that the author intentionally chooses to ignore the community that is providing fixes, patches and modifications; in favor of living in his own little fantasy land where everyone continues to buy the buggy code and he can forever continue to ignore those fixes, patches and his major security holes while purposely stagnating development for the purpose of claiming authorship; whereas "ownership" is the more appropriate definition.
To exasperate that core fundamental philosophy issue, each so-called, "update" released over that past 4 years has failed to address stabilization or standardization issues but rather has concentrated on whimsical features that themselves don't function properly and compound the already bad baseline query issues while also changing things that create compatibility problems in other areas such as the certainly required baseline "patched" and other updates as well as GT mods, forums mods and non-baseline modules and blocks.
The lack of a singe, all-module, group hierarchy and a baseline input/output model with defined proper coding standards for queries and functions as well as serious resolution of the 20th century PHP3/MySQL 3 coding methodologies make it necessary for any serious CMS content provider to consider other avenues beyond Nuke, especially when the author ignores much needed evolution from willing contributors.
The sad truth is that many committed content providers have already moved away from Nuke because so little has ever been offered in terms of the author addressing any of the real-world needs and desires (yes, sometimes two distinctly different, yet equally important things) of the once tremendously large, but now much smaller Nuke community.
The fact remains that in Mr. Burzi's world there is no real community. People buy, but that is about as far as it goes. The home of Nuke still fails to provide any public avenue for support, to provide any feedback features or enabled forums and in fact fails to employ any of the core features that the solution is designed to deliver. Rather, the site offers a useless and laughable collection of files while also favoring annoying advertising saturation on every page. Links to places where you can get help? Forget that too.
Is it hopeless? Debatable.
But what do you do to really address all of this without either ending up with either an open-source dictatorship or Nazi clan OR taking actions to evolve Nuke that would only support a continuation of the historically bad and certainly unacceptable status quo? This is where my mixed feelings about contributions from the die-hards arise.
It makes a good topic and that's really all I know. Having non-author patches out for a so-called, "final" revision this soon out of the gate (and not a peep from the author about it) speaks volumes. I'm forced to ask, is anyone else hearing the sounds of a train de-railing, over and over and over again?
Steph
P.S. Now Raven, must I really send a PM? Of course I'd love to play with it!
Joined: Feb 21, 2006 Posts: 1468 Location: In front of a screen....HELP! lol
Posted:
Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:23 pm
I agree whole heartedly, but at the same time, you must remember that what little of the community is left, IT still EXISTS.
As a die-hard nuker. I have seen the patches, the "updated nuke" and more come from this community. Nuke is regretably already made a reputation of being exploitable(and more). But the truth is, why harp on what FB is or isnt doing, My vote is for Ravennuke and other CMS' to emerge based off of the similar functionality of nuke. Nuke offers more then most need but has flaws. The effort has been made to get FB's attention BUT He refuses to answer the demand of the community he helped to create (I wont take away from the credit). We, as a community must address the fundamentals ourselves and not depend on FB to address them for us because we already know what hell do or not do.
So praise Ravennuke as the nuke to the next level and let it make its own reputation and Let nuke survive off that and not FB's plunderous codes.
Im sure most have attempted to address FB in the most formal way, but I personally believe in breaking away From FB completely and redo nuke from the Ground up. So lets start a new train or Fix the broke one and ride that one, one that FB wont touch.
I agree whole heartedly, but at the same time, you must remember that what little of the community is left, IT still EXISTS.
As a die-hard nuker. I have seen the patches, the "updated nuke" and more come from this community. Nuke is regretably already made a reputation of being exploitable(and more). But the truth is, why harp on what FB is or isnt doing, My vote is for Ravennuke and other CMS' to emerge based off of the similar functionality of nuke. Nuke offers more then most need but has flaws. The effort has been made to get FB's attention BUT He refuses to answer the demand of the community he helped to create (I wont take away from the credit). We, as a community must address the fundamentals ourselves and not depend on FB to address them for us because we already know what hell do or not do.
So praise Ravennuke as the nuke to the next level and let it make its own reputation and Let nuke survive off that and not FB's plunderous codes.
Im sure most have attempted to address FB in the most formal way, but I personally believe in breaking away From FB completely and redo nuke from the Ground up. So lets start a new train or Fix the broke one and ride that one, one that FB wont touch.
Well said!
Here is something funny:
Only registered users can see links on this board! Get registered or login to the forums!
Joined: Feb 21, 2006 Posts: 1468 Location: In front of a screen....HELP! lol
Posted:
Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:27 pm
The only thing I can say is I am currently developing a hosting CMS based off of nukes layout, modules will be able to be added and such, anyone who can REALLY get to the nitty-gritty of the php-nuke security concerns, I know most of them but I am not as confortable with php security as others might be.
It wont be nuke, It will be coded each function/character and such by myself and others. If REALLY interested in doing something from the GROUND up with php-nukes functionality and options, PM me and I only have one request, Raven if you have time, Id like you to be one of the top level testers, Even if this doesnt branch into a whole new CMS. Im still very confused with how to avoid the GPL liscense nuke uses when making this, and how to leave it nuke compatible and such.
So the more input, the more complete this will be.
Joined: Mar 06, 2004 Posts: 1140 Location: Manchester, NH USA
Posted:
Sun Oct 15, 2006 7:14 pm
darklord wrote:
I agree whole heartedly, but at the same time, you must remember that what little of the community is left, IT still EXISTS.
As a die-hard nuker. I have seen the patches, the "updated nuke" and more come from this community. Nuke is regretably already made a reputation of being exploitable(and more). But the truth is, why harp on what FB is or isnt doing, My vote is for Ravennuke and other CMS' to emerge based off of the similar functionality of nuke. Nuke offers more then most need but has flaws.
I don't yet know if Raven is considering his version as a fork, or rather a compilation. We haven't had much time to chat yet since I got back. I'm all for a fork, I think that this is what I was trying to say; however, it would require a significant committment from those involved to modify the baseline functionality and in thus doing so, to resolve the module and block baseline standards as compatibility will instantly become an issue. This is my complaint about FB in that without him addressing these issues in Nuke, there can be no real evolution of Nuke. Other CMS's, sure, but not Nuke.
darklord wrote:
The effort has been made to get FB's attention BUT He refuses to answer the demand of the community he helped to create (I wont take away from the credit). We, as a community must address the fundamentals ourselves and not depend on FB to address them for us because we already know what hell do or not do.
Actually, the first part is exactly what I was saying; however, I disagree with the last sentence. If you are going to work on Nuke as any kind of developer or even as a webmaster, you need to KNOW that the author is committed to evolution of the baseline code to not only ensure stablilization of security and establishing module/block/theme compliant standards, but that in doing so, establish a real baseline model for allow conversion of add-on solutions for use in that baseline. Without stabilization and standardization of baseline being delivered from the author at php-puke.org, there can be no real evolution of baseline features, never mind evolving add-on blocks, modules or themes to properly function without that (now standardized, filtered and compliant) baseline. Of course this should be true and expected from ANY real software solution provider; however, FB really exemplifies how bad things can be not only for right now (in terms of what you as a webmaster are running), but what the next "update" will do to destroy your life. It's like getting stabbed in the back a couple of times a year.
darklord wrote:
So praise Ravennuke as the nuke to the next level and let it make its own reputation and Let nuke survive off that and not FB's plunderous codes.
Im sure most have attempted to address FB in the most formal way, but I personally believe in breaking away From FB completely and redo nuke from the Ground up. So lets start a new train or Fix the broke one and ride that one, one that FB wont touch.
Again, "To fork or not to fork". This conversation has gone round for quite a while. While I try to figure out what the new distro is, I'll be content simply to commend Raven and others in going forward. I'm just hoping that the parties involved aren't merely trying to fix up a junk car, but are ready to rebuild it from the ground up and then tell the users that hope can be found not from Nuke, but from some animal of a new name that won't carry any of those stigmas.
Joined: Feb 21, 2006 Posts: 1468 Location: In front of a screen....HELP! lol
Posted:
Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:32 pm
Well, I agree about knowing the author stands by the work, except I personally would always rather have a better person(s) coding something If I feel better with that.
Basically, I feel better knowing Raven and the team are on RavenNuke then dealing with FB's B-S.
So If its a question of fork or not to fork, Ravens got my vote and Ill do all I can to help see what I feel is the best option occur.[/i]
(He's back)
We could marry up what we've done with his work, as a Team, and have a rock-solid release of PHP-Nuke, fast, bug free, XHTML/HTML compliant, etc, etc, etc, and finally give the community what FB should have given them all along!
Of course I'd love to play with it!
