This appears to have changed in the latest version. There now appears to be only one place to make the edit. The 'PT30M'. Is this a safe edit, are there any gotchas I may have missed?. . . /applications/core/widgets. . . /* Do we have permission? */
if ( !\IPS\Member::loggedIn()->canAccessModule( \IPS\Application\Module::get( 'core', 'online' ) ) )
$where = array(
array( 'core_sessions.running_time>' . \IPS\DateTime::create()->sub( new \DateInterval( 'PT30M' ) )->getTimeStamp() ),
array( 'core_groups.g_hide_online_list=0' )
I just read this: http://barker.co.uk/cookielaw It seems to me that unless you're operating one if the top 200 sites in the UK you've got little to worry about no matter what you choose to do, and even if you are top 200, no one is being fined anyway. So, it looks like an excuse for rinky dink forum site owners to talk about lofty legal talk. I guarantee none of you visitors give a hoot. But remaining on topic, being compliant appears as straightforward as inserting a line of code to your global template (like you would with an additional meta tag). . . so I conclude IPS already provides the necessary functionality and you can all quit your Euroweeny whining.
It sure finances mine, because no matter how much the unelected EU lawmakers bleat on about everyone having to comply, nobody outside the EU has to give a crap. What are they going to do to us in Singapore, throw stones? All this absurd legislation does is advantage non-EU entities. Even so, I don't think anyone has yet been prosecuted, all they've apparently done is send out letters. Farce at the expense of EU tax payers. Anecdotally, the only sites I've seen complying are British ones (BBC et al). Perversely, the British seem to do more than most EU states to comply with the blizzard of legislation that comes out of the EU. Probably why they're so sick of it. In summary, I have a fatter breakfast lunch and dinner on my table for ignoring the above and nobody is ever going to penalise us for that.
Well I believe bad law SHOULD be disobeyed. Regarding this '5 page' topic, quod erat demonstrandum. Even the lawyers (i.e. the people most likely to profit from it) are groaning at this kind of legislative diarrhea.
I looked at this a few years ago when it became an issue. I'm British, but I live in Thailand and my server is in Singapore. So, I shrugged my shoulders I decided to ignore it, and wish Europeans all the best with their schizophrenic social controls. That may not be the right attitude but I'm a closet anarchist.
Personally I'm happy to take the early upgrade issues on the chin. I'm of the mind that early adopters are needed, at the end of the day someone has got to find the inevitable bugs, it helps the community of customers as a whole. I've been experiencing some significant upgrade issues that lead me to believe the move to RC stage was premature and it should have stayed in Beta a while longer. Having said that, I accept what comes with being an early adopter. Everyone needs Beta/RC testers, there are just too many environment variables in the real world to reliably predict the outcome on a test server.