Your second paragraph is as amusing to read as is your assumptions of my age and knowledge of internet history. My first reply was pretty blunt, but that's because I think it really is silly to state "go to post 5" in a post and always assume that post 5 (at that moment in time) is going to be what you think it is forever after. Post numbers are in no way linked to post id's, post numbers are dynamic. If a post goes missing (moderation, corruption... whatever) or if someone requests their account and all their posts be deleted, all your the post numbers which you have written in your topics will be invalid on that topic. But perhaps you have a very special case where nothing ever changes, if this is the case your forum is different to the general majority of forums in which 10's or 100's of posts are moderated everyday. Post numbering is simply not reliable.
If it was intentional, and you don't want to deal with changing numbers in your posts. get a plugin or switch software, what choice do you have other than using the old software? As I said, sitting in the past. You shouldn't need to spend a cent on a third-party mod to do this if it doesn't get added back. A theme hook adding post numbers is probably one of the simplest mods you can make for this software. If no-one else makes one, I'll probably do it myself. Regarding the display of embedded topic links, that's an issue that can be discussed separately to this. I thought I made it fairly clear by the last sentence, but I looks like I wasn't clear enough. The "compelling case" I was asking you to provide was not for me, I was asking you (since it's so "frightening" as you put it) to provide a quality argument to go into this topic, something that may make IPS reconsider things because this topic did not have one. This wasn't just said by me. Vikestart above also mentioned the lack of a good argument here. So far the only reasoning for keeping it that I'm seeing is built upon habit from past days. I think BBCode is a good example of something we'll be saying goodbye to come IPS5, there will probably be many complaints on this, a lot more than post numbers being removed. While I don't believe there is a good reason to keep them anymore, If IPS adds the little numbers back, I won't mind, they don't annoy me.
It could very well be an oversight, there are other issues that exist which I think could be oversights (e.g just tonight I noticed the Who's Online widget does not have configuration for a timeout.)
Yes that should be safe, it doesn't modify the database if thats what you mean.
Regarding group visibility, at the end of that file you'll see /* Display */ Return, replace that with: /* Display */
$visibleToGroups = array(2,4); // 2 = Guest, 4 = Default Admin group
return (in_array(\IPS\Member::loggedIn()->member_group_id,$visibleToGroups) ? $this->output( $members, $memberCount, $guests, $anonymous ) : '');Add more group id's to that $visibleToGroups array.
EDIT: You could do the opposite way if it's more suitable so you don't have to edit for new groups. /* Display */
$hideForGroups = array(2); // 2 = Guest
return (in_array(\IPS\Member::loggedIn()->member_group_id,$hideForGroups) ? '' : $this->output( $members, $memberCount, $guests, $anonymous ));
Um no thats the SQL result limit and you're actually cutting the amount of results in the query. You probably shouldn't touch that. Pretty sure you should be modifying the widget not the online module. File: core\widget\whosOnline.php Make sure you edit times for both member and guest. Hopefully IPS will give this widget an option panel for this, probably just an oversight.
Not use silly methods like dynamic post numbers to identify posts. Alternatively you can sit in the past forever. Both work. You talk as if they've ignored everyone and did their own thing for IPS4. They haven't, in fact the entire rebuild was a result of feedback from the 3x series. They aren't trying to reinvent the wheel, not even in the slightest. They're fixing a very old wheel and bringing it to the standards of today, not 10 years ago. Did you not voice your concerns last year when the development site was available to all users to see and give feedback on?, if you did, did you provide a compelling argument as to why they must exist? IPS interact with "experienced" users every day, and "experienced" uses give them feedback all the time. It does not mean "experienced" users can't be wrong, it does not mean "experienced" users must always been listened to because there is no way they might be holding onto the past and could be afraid of change and everything "experienced" users say is obviously more logical, reasonable and compelling. Please provide a compelling case as to why they must stay and why the alternatives aren't a good enough replacement other than "I built my forum around a pole and now the pole is moving but I think the pole should stay just because I like where it used to be". Thats the only way you might get IPS to change their mind on the feature in the next main release (because the feature addition stage for the 4.0 release has past).
The form helper "stack" is pretty great, however it doesn't look like I can provide options to the form that the stack is using. Can an additional option for the Stack helper be added to pass onto the form that is being used? And while I'm at it, for "KeyValue" is there a simple way to set the "Key" and "Value" labels to my own strings? Cheers.