Forum Reorganization

[krakent3ch]

Also shouldn't there be a section for LT supported VM's like OpenELEC. Where one can post their issues and also LT can post info about updates available for the VM.

[RobJ]

It's my view that a significant number of users are not seeing the categories at all, just the board names.  Because of that, a significant number of v5 users have been posting their support topic in the v6 General Support, and we have to move the post to the v5 General Support, and edit the Move post to say 'General Support' for v5, so they will know WHY we are moving their post from General Support to General Support.  An even larger number of v6 users have been posting in the v5 General Support, and we have to move their thread to the v6 General Support, editing the Move post to say it's going to the v6 one.  They look and they see 2 General Support boards, not their category, and they pick one.

 

As much as I like most of the new organization, this is one thing I don't, as the problem above just got even worse.  Now their choice for support is the 'General Support' board and the 'General' board.  Which one do you think is going to get even more of the support posts?  And we will have to edit the Move post to add 'Support for v6' to 'General', each time.

 

I strongly believe and recommend that board names should be able to stand alone, fully descriptive by themselves.  So I recommend the 2 support boards be named something like 'General Support for v6' and 'General Support for older versions'.  I know that from our top down view that seems redundant, but that's because we *are* looking at it from the top down.  It seems apparent though that many users are only seeing the boards from the ground up, as just a bunch of boards.

 

On a different subject, I'm willing to help in the topic moving.  I see 2 areas where there will be a lot of posts moving, and that's with the plugins and with the feature requests.  I like the idea of 2 plugin folders, something like 'V6 Plugins' and 'Legacy Plugins', and I will help with that.  But first we need a clear statement of policy about what goes where, and what current plugin authors are expected to do with their current threads.  But another area of concern is all the feature requests we have had, and all the old and new boards where they currently reside.  It's going to be a big job rescuing old requests that are still valid, and probably not every one will agree on which ones to 'rehabilitate'.  I'm curious, what happened to all the requests on the 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 boards that have been removed?  I believe some of them are still valid, and some of them had useful discussion attached (I think).

 

Edit: I see Jonp is already rescuing old requests!

[jonp]

Ok, a few things were decided tonight to further improve the reorganization effort:

[*]A new board will be created called Docker Engine under Support (unRAID 6 Only).

[*]All threads relating to issues configuring Docker for use on unRAID (not for specific containers) will go under Docker Engine (this means moving threads from the Docker Containers board).

[*]The Docker Containers board will be a child board of Docker Engine, and restricted so only Community Developers can post new topics for applications or repositories they support.

[*]All support threads for plugins that work on v6 will be moved to the Plugins forum under Support (unRAID 6 Only).

[*]The Virtual Machines (KVM) board will be renamed to KVM Hypervisor.

[*]The VM Appliances child board will be renamed to VM Templates.

[*]A new thread will be sticked under VM Templates for OpenELEC VM Support.

 

A few comments:

• No announcement board for docker apps will be added for now.  Need to better understand the reason for it.  New containers available = new post.  Update to existing container?  User can use notifications in webGui to be alerted to updates, then check support thread for info on the update if the author chooses to put it there.
  
• If a thread contains support for a plugin on both V5 and V6, it should still be moved to the Support (unRAID 6 Only) -> Plugins board.
  
• Moderators are encouraged to help move threads where necessary based upon the above, but please refrain from moving the sticky threads (we'll handle those).
  

[trurl]

'''

All support threads for plugins that work on v6 will be moved to the Plugins forum under Support (unRAID 6 Only)

...

If a thread contains support for a plugin on both V5 and V6, it should still be moved to the Support (unRAID 6 Only) -> Plugins board.

...

Looks like ALL plugins are in V6. We need them to all be in a Legacy Plugins subforum and start with an empty v6 Plugins subforum so we can move the qualifying threads there.

 

[jonp]

'''

All support threads for plugins that work on v6 will be moved to the Plugins forum under Support (unRAID 6 Only)

...

If a thread contains support for a plugin on both V5 and V6, it should still be moved to the Support (unRAID 6 Only) -> Plugins board.

...

Looks like ALL plugins are in V6. We need them to all be in a Legacy Plugins subforum and start with an empty v6 Plugins subforum so we can move the qualifying threads there.

 

Other way around...  I am ok with creating a new Plugins forum for Legacy Support (v5) and letting those who care to move threads back, but not the other way around.  Many authors have threads for both v5/6 in a single thread.  That's their choice, but we're not going to default to the non-current version for those threads.  The author can choose to maintain a single thread under V6 support or create a new thread under the V5 plugin forum I'll create to separate 32 and 64-bit support.

[trurl]

'''

All support threads for plugins that work on v6 will be moved to the Plugins forum under Support (unRAID 6 Only)

...

If a thread contains support for a plugin on both V5 and V6, it should still be moved to the Support (unRAID 6 Only) -> Plugins board.

...

Looks like ALL plugins are in V6. We need them to all be in a Legacy Plugins subforum and start with an empty v6 Plugins subforum so we can move the qualifying threads there.

 

Other way around...  I am ok with creating a new Plugins forum for Legacy Support (v5) and letting those who care to move threads back, but not the other way around.  Many authors have threads for both v5/6 in a single thread.  That's their choice, but we're not going to default to the non-current version for those threads.  The author can choose to maintain a single thread under V6 support or create a new thread under the V5 plugin forum I'll create to separate 32 and 64-bit support.

I think we must have a miscommunication or something.

 

As it currently stands, the v6 Plugins subforum has 418 topics. The vast majority of these are Legacy. Are you saying we must go to the trouble of moving the vast majority of these to a Legacy Plugins subforum yet to be created? Seems like it would make a lot more sense to have all of them in the Legacy Plugins subforum, and then move the much more manageable number of v6 compatible plugins to a v6 Plugins folder that started as empty.

[jonp]

In general it looks pretty good.  There are quite a few things listed in the "OS Issue List" in the legacy section that aren't "issues" or "bugs" at all ... but really just feature requests => but trying to move everything to the "perfect" section isn't a task you or anyone else has time for, so I'd say it's all fine.

 

I'd ask all mods to please move threads where appropriate based on the new organization.  If something now sits somewhere it doesn't belong, please feel free to move it to the right place.  I've already moved a few of those threads like doron's encryption request and mover preserving mtime to the Feature Requests board under Development.

 

I do think the "legacy" section should have a v4.7 thread, as there are still folks who post requests for help with that from time to time.    All of the earlier versions are deprecated; but I know quite a few members who still run v4.7 -- if you're strictly running UnRAID as a NAS and don't need > 2TB support it's a rock-solid system and there should at least be a place where someone can post a question.

 

Let's have a sticky thread under General Support (V5) for older version support.  Want to create that one gary?

 

I strongly believe and recommend that board names should be able to stand alone, fully descriptive by themselves.  So I recommend the 2 support boards be named something like 'General Support for v6' and 'General Support for older versions'.  I know that from our top down view that seems redundant, but that's because we *are* looking at it from the top down.  It seems apparent though that many users are only seeing the boards from the ground up, as just a bunch of boards.

 

I renamed the categories and the board names for where there are duplicates to be more clear.  Please let me know if I missed any.

 

On a different subject, I'm willing to help in the topic moving.  I see 2 areas where there will be a lot of posts moving, and that's with the plugins and with the feature requests.  I like the idea of 2 plugin folders, something like 'V6 Plugins' and 'Legacy Plugins', and I will help with that.  But first we need a clear statement of policy about what goes where, and what current plugin authors are expected to do with their current threads.

 

See my previous reply in this thread for "what goes where."

 

But another area of concern is all the feature requests we have had, and all the old and new boards where they currently reside.  It's going to be a big job rescuing old requests that are still valid, and probably not every one will agree on which ones to 'rehabilitate'.  I'm curious, what happened to all the requests on the 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 boards that have been removed?  I believe some of them are still valid, and some of them had useful discussion attached (I think).

 

Any feature request that is still valid (meaning hasn't been implemented yet in v6) can be moved to the Development -> Feature Request board.  The entire development board is forward-looking only.  It's not a specific version of unRAID.  Features may be implemented in the short term (6.x) or the longer term (7.x or later).  Until they are implemented or thoroughly rejected, they should remain as a feature request.  Fair?

 

Also shouldn't there be a section for LT supported VM's like OpenELEC. Where one can post their issues and also LT can post info about updates available for the VM.

 

Yes, I am going to add a sticky thread under VM Templates (the child board for KVM Hypervisor) that will act as a support thread for that VM.

 

 

Also, in reply to CHBMB, we definitely want one thread per CONTAINER, not per REPO.  I think it's easier to support that way and easier for the users.

Good luck with that.  Of the 216 templates created, off the top of my head only around 40% have separate support threads created for each container. The remainder have the announcement thread as the support thread. 

 

You're going to have to convince the authors to create separate threads and update the templates (which will in turn automatically update the repo thread and the links given by CA)

 

I whole heartedly agree with the effort (why we introduced the <support> tag in the first place) but its going to be an uphill battle...

 

In a discussion today, we decided to leave things status quo.  If a container author wants to group support for their repo all into a giant thread, so be it.  If they want to have individual threads (which I think is by far better), then go for it.  Users can decide if that really matters or not to them and pick a different app/repo if it matters enough.  We don't want to be too heavy-handed here.

 

May I also suggest to have a sticky under Support -> General with links to the various wiki articles. It isn't always that obvious where to find the information.

 

Yes, we can do that.  Would like to nominate RobJ to create / sticky that thread since he seems to be a Wiki machine anyway ;-).

 

As it currently stands, the v6 Plugins subforum has 418 topics. The vast majority of these are Legacy. Are you saying we must go to the trouble of moving the vast majority of these to a Legacy Plugins subforum yet to be created? Seems like it would make a lot more sense to have all of them in the Legacy Plugins subforum, and then move the much more manageable number of v6 compatible plugins to a v6 Plugins folder that started as empty.

 

No, I'm saying that of those 418 topics, only two pages worth have been replied to within the last ~60 days.  The remainder are inactive.  So prune the first two pages worth and move those active in-use threads to the appropriate place.  For the remainder?  If a legacy thread gets resurrected with a new reply, we can move it at that time.  If a user / moderator PMs us about a legacy thread under v6 plugins, we can move it then.

 

We can also add a sticky under the Plugins (V5) forum that alerts users that if they can't find an old thread here, to check the V6 board.

 

I don't expect anyone to want to move a bunch of old and inactive threads around.

[CHBMB]

Just came onto the forum after the reorganisation.  I like it, think it's a lot cleaner and far more intuitive.  Good work to all the mods who contributed to the sort out!

[Squid]

Just came onto the forum after the reorganisation.  I like it, think it's a lot cleaner and far more intuitive.  Good work to all the mods who contributed to the sort out!

Except that apparently nobody can reply in Docker Containers

[CHBMB]

Just came onto the forum after the reorganisation.  I like it, think it's a lot cleaner and far more intuitive.  Good work to all the mods who contributed to the sort out!

Except that apparently nobody can reply in Docker Containers

 

Yeah, but it makes it a lot easier for authors to maintain.... 

[Squid]

Just came onto the forum after the reorganisation.  I like it, think it's a lot cleaner and far more intuitive.  Good work to all the mods who contributed to the sort out!

Except that apparently nobody can reply in Docker Containers

 

Yeah, but it makes it a lot easier for authors to maintain.... 

And if our friend did his job right there'd never be any support questions either   

[jonp]

Just came onto the forum after the reorganisation.  I like it, think it's a lot cleaner and far more intuitive.  Good work to all the mods who contributed to the sort out!

Except that apparently nobody can reply in Docker Containers

 

 

It's fixed now...

[sparklyballs]

Just came onto the forum after the reorganisation.  I like it, think it's a lot cleaner and far more intuitive.  Good work to all the mods who contributed to the sort out!

Except that apparently nobody can reply in Docker Containers

 

Yeah, but it makes it a lot easier for authors to maintain.... 

And if our friend did his job right there'd never be any support questions either   

 

like you have any friends....

[jonp]

One more thing I may do here is create a Plugin Manager board and make Plugins (v6) a child board of it, then use the same permissions for that child board as the Docker Containers board.  Probably should do the same thing with VM appliances.  Thoughts?

[CHBMB]

One more thing I may do here is create a Plugin Manager board and make Plugins (v6) a child board of it, then use the same permissions for that child board as the Docker Containers board.  Probably should do the same thing with VM appliances.  Thoughts?

 

Sounds like a good idea to me, makes sense and will make finding things intuitive.

[bonienl]

One more thing I may do here is create a Plugin Manager board and make Plugins (v6) a child board of it, then use the same permissions for that child board as the Docker Containers board.  Probably should do the same thing with VM appliances.  Thoughts?

 

I like the idea, it certainly makes sense, but just wondering who are the VM creators which will add topics to that child board?

 

[jonp]

One more thing I may do here is create a Plugin Manager board and make Plugins (v6) a child board of it, then use the same permissions for that child board as the Docker Containers board.  Probably should do the same thing with VM appliances.  Thoughts?

 

I like the idea, it certainly makes sense, but just wondering who are the VM creators which will add topics to that child board?

Exactly why I didn't do this last night. Right now, there is one image template provided by binhex, and there will be another for OpenELEC very soon. But an entire forum for just two VMs?  Probably not a great idea.  Longer term I plan on releasing more pre built templates for other OSes like SteamOS, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc., but all in due time.

[RobJ]

Great work, JonP.  I'm happy with everything but the following, for which I have an alternate suggestion.

 

I do think the "legacy" section should have a v4.7 thread, as there are still folks who post requests for help with that from time to time.    All of the earlier versions are deprecated; but I know quite a few members who still run v4.7 -- if you're strictly running UnRAID as a NAS and don't need > 2TB support it's a rock-solid system and there should at least be a place where someone can post a question.

 

Let's have a sticky thread under General Support (V5) for older version support.  Want to create that one gary?

 

I thought about a sticky thread for v4 support, but we always prefer users create a separate thread for every support 'ticket', and we don't really want another support board.  And when I look at the support board for v5, it's already perfect for support for v4.  It has all the right stickies set up(!), and it's mission is essentially the same, provide support for an older version.  For both, we want to help the user with their problem, PLUS push them to upgrade to v6.  The ONLY distinction I can think of is the arbitrary use of the version number in the board name.  The distinction is not between v6 and v5, but between v6 and everything older.  Therefore, I'd like to suggest that we change 'General Support (V5)' to something like 'General Support (V5 or older)'.

 

And we could add a sticky about the strong recommendation to upgrade everyone to v6, maybe add some hints about end of life, etc.

[jonp]

Great work, JonP.  I'm happy with everything but the following, for which I have an alternate suggestion.

 

I do think the "legacy" section should have a v4.7 thread, as there are still folks who post requests for help with that from time to time.    All of the earlier versions are deprecated; but I know quite a few members who still run v4.7 -- if you're strictly running UnRAID as a NAS and don't need > 2TB support it's a rock-solid system and there should at least be a place where someone can post a question.

 

Let's have a sticky thread under General Support (V5) for older version support.  Want to create that one gary?

 

I thought about a sticky thread for v4 support, but we always prefer users create a separate thread for every support 'ticket', and we don't really want another support board.  And when I look at the support board for v5, it's already perfect for support for v4.  It has all the right stickies set up(!), and it's mission is essentially the same, provide support for an older version.  For both, we want to help the user with their problem, PLUS push them to upgrade to v6.  The ONLY distinction I can think of is the arbitrary use of the version number in the board name.  The distinction is not between v6 and v5, but between v6 and everything older.  Therefore, I'd like to suggest that we change 'General Support (V5)' to something like 'General Support (V5 or older)'.

 

And we could add a sticky about the strong recommendation to upgrade everyone to v6, maybe add some hints about end of life, etc.

Let me confer with Tom on this as you make a fair argument.

[jonp]

Tom was good with the proposed change, so I will do that right now.

[CHBMB]

We've got "The Lounge" for OT stuff (but meant to be kind of storage related) what about a "Pub"? OT, not necessarily anything about storage at all, like a general chat, I mean by the nature of the motley crew that hangout hear it's likely to be "techy" but not necessarily.

 

On the other hand "The Lounge" isn't moderated with a strict enforcement policy so maybe not needed..

 

I'm British, a Pub is a national institution. 

 

I'd like to see an Unraid user map, showing (within the realms of privacy) how far and wide across the globe people are using Unraid and maybe an introductions thread.

 

If we can make it look a nice, friendly place, and lets face it, it is.  Then it'll enable people who are maybe just curious, to come, hangout and a proportion of those may become customers.

 

Just a thought of an idle brain, but I've met a lot of great people on here from far and wide, I've met people from India, Canada, the USA, Norway, Germany, Poland and Planet Sparklyballs. 

 

I think the community is one hell of a selling point to Unraid and maybe try and capitalise on it.  If you want to see how good the community is, then go visit forums of other unamed storage solutions and the vibe just isn't the same..

[Squid]

 

I'd like to see an Unraid user map, showing (within the realms of privacy) how far and wide across the globe people are using Unraid and maybe an introductions thread.

 

Something like this: http://lime-technology.com/unraid-by-country/ but calculated real time by the forum profile settings.

 

Planet Sparklyballs. 

Definitely deserving to be in a world of his own....

[CHBMB]

Something like this: http://lime-technology.com/unraid-by-country/ but calculated real time by the forum profile settings.

 

Yeah, exactly that...

 

Planet Sparklyballs.

 

Definitely deserving to be in a world of his own....

 

Yep, get the feeling an evening in the pub with his sense of humour would be a most amusing night, talk about "King of One Liners"

[sparklyballs]

 

I'd like to see an Unraid user map, showing (within the realms of privacy) how far and wide across the globe people are using Unraid and maybe an introductions thread.

 

Something like this: http://lime-technology.com/unraid-by-country/ but calculated real time by the forum profile settings.

 

Planet Sparklyballs. 

Definitely deserving to be in a world of his own....

 

i'll just settle for leader of this one.

[jonp]

We've got "The Lounge" for OT stuff (but meant to be kind of storage related) what about a "Pub"? OT, not necessarily anything about storage at all, like a general chat, I mean by the nature of the motley crew that hangout hear it's likely to be "techy" but not necessarily.

 

On the other hand "The Lounge" isn't moderated with a strict enforcement policy so maybe not needed..

 

I'm British, a Pub is a national institution. 

 

I'd like to see an Unraid user map, showing (within the realms of privacy) how far and wide across the globe people are using Unraid and maybe an introductions thread.

 

If we can make it look a nice, friendly place, and lets face it, it is.  Then it'll enable people who are maybe just curious, to come, hangout and a proportion of those may become customers.

 

Just a thought of an idle brain, but I've met a lot of great people on here from far and wide, I've met people from India, Canada, the USA, Norway, Germany, Poland and Planet Sparklyballs. 

 

I think the community is one hell of a selling point to Unraid and maybe try and capitalise on it.  If you want to see how good the community is, then go visit forums of other unamed storage solutions and the vibe just isn't the same..

 

Ok, chatted with Tom a bit on this.  We are going to move the lounge to the top of the list under Community and put up a new description as "A place for new users to introduce themselves and existing users to chit-chat."  I don't think we need to have a separate forum from the lounge, we just need to repurpose the lounge as a "talk about anything" forum (basically like an off-topic forum).  That said, I would ask that the mods help us by removing posts with links to illegal content or anything like that (as we do with any other forum anyhow).