Imagine the user has been reported before. Now if you report him again, the original report will be bumped with the new report message. But if you don't read very closely, you might not actually notice the new message, so you will get confused about why this old report is showing up again.
Also, when people comment on this report it becomes very hard to see which comments are talking about the new report and which ones are talking about the old one. Depending on the amount of discussion before one might even have to browse through several pages of comments to find it.
And now imagine the chaos if this happens multiple times for a single user.
Would it be possible to add a separate reporting system for status updates (like for posts, blogs and so on)? At the moment the only way to report these is by reporting the user, which gets very confusing over time, since when there are multiple status update reports for a user they all end up getting combined into one giant report thread.
I am not talking about diff reports or anything like that. Having the list of fixed bugs but with some priorities assigned would already be a lot more helpful. Ideally new features would also get tracked through the bug tracker and would show up in that list as well.
I would just like to bring this topic back, as I still think a change log would be essential. An unsorted 7-page list of bug reports just doesn't cut it. It doesn't tell me what is important and what is just a minor fix, it doesn't tell me what the breaking changes are, it doesn't tell me where the known issues lie and it doesn't tell me what areas have been changed at all.
So instead I have to either install the update and hope for the best or manually diff the files to see what has been changed, both of which I would not call good solutions.
I really don't understand why this is such a problem.
I don't think Cloudflare is the problem here. The reason that IPS activated Cloudflare in the first place was probably that they were being targeted by DDoS attacks that they could not cope with on their own. So the site would probably be down a lot more without it...
Don't be fooled, the editor in 3.3.4 is also far from perfect, to the point where we ended up moving some of our larger posts into an external Wiki because there were so many formatting issues. I don't know what the editor in 3.2 is like, but it might make sense to wait...
I agree that a pluggable editor would be nice to have, but for the moment I think the most important thing would be to make the non-CKE editor more useful. I would rather have a nice text-only editor in 3.4.2 and a pluggable editor in 4.0 than a half-working text-only editor and a half-working pluggable editor in 3.4.2...
I have already mentioned this in another place, but I just wanted to reiterate this here:
There really needs to be a changelog for every version that details what has been added, changed, fixed and removed, and most importantly what the breaking changes are and if there are known issues. The bugtracker and the few superficial blog posts that usually get posted are really not adequate for this purpose. Almost every other software I am aware of, both free and paid, does this, and for good reason!
I realize this may mean a little additional work on your part, but the lack of a changelog is a huge inconvenience to a lot of your users. I often had to resort to just do an upgrade and then see what issues crop up and what new changes I see on my forums, which is just a horrible way of doing things!
I have some users who write large articles with lots of formatting, which may be an explanation why issues are more readily noticed on my forums. But nevertheless, even if you don't get direct complaints, wouldn't you have to agree that there are some major problems with the editor right now?