Wait, we did? xD; I been on FA since a couple weeks after its initial [re]inception in 2005 (under my old username), tho I don't seem to recall this. ^^;;
2005 is when the site came back after the long break!!! FA excists already way longer than that and we had banners back in the day for a very short time???
Pushing premium service and a verified mark, overhauled the site, gave banners, but yet no search blacklist, ability to change names, and their advertisement banner blocks the top of every picture.
they can push all the premium stuff its fine tbh but I feel you the banners are super old stuff the layout is old we had that on FA before the great shutdown like...10 years ago or so? nothing really new? I dunno if you mean real adds or their news window cause you can close that
Well honestly, changing a username is a pretty massive coding and database undertaking - way more complicated than most people would think! Of course it's certainly a lot more involved than increasing image upload size limits or modifying CSS stylesheets, haha. Plus, FA is coded in the spare time of some volunteers, unlike Twitter or other major sites which have large teams of paid engineers.
Hopefully though we'll get this someday soon! I'm quite sure it's on the roadmap anyway. xD
it is since yearssssss and I of course understand the whole team just having it on the site but its what people demand and I understand that a lot. I kinda never gonna change my name but others like...evolved or stuff so that would be super nice. And the moment you gonna offer it on FA+ Im sure subscriptions will go highhhhh.
So I'm curious, as someone who actually works with databases. What's the biggest hitch? Far as I see FA has usernames as keys, which means replacing said key name with another name, and swapping all submission/journal/whatever else ownerships to the new key. Am I missing something? Or is it just a time of volunteers thing?
Of course all existing links to users will break, and I highly doubt that you'd want to search up every user link through every submission/journal/comment just to make sure they still work. Alternatively have an automatic redirect of renamed users to the new one, though this becomes more database intensive over time.
And if you wanted it a bit more professional one could easily though possibly tediously have numerical IDs appended sorted by date creation, then just make usernames nothing more than an interchangeable variable. Put an arbitrary time limit on it to prevent abuse and you're done. I'm sure most sites do it like this.
Also if you do it with numerical IDs you can under the hood make sure that any links to other people will be saved as their numerical ID, but when editing it displays the name. This would future-proof everything.
(For the record, I've worked with databases too, though it's not a regular part of my job, I'm a network engineer. I'll let the DevOps guys deal with that x3 But yeah I know exactly what you're talking about!)
Honestly I'm curious about the same question, though I think it is really just a time of volunteers thing. And actually, FA does have numerical IDs under the hood - I only know this because years ago, the way the shouts section permalinks worked, you could actually determine your user ID from it. Mine (original username) was like 4451 or something, I joined FA within the first 4500 users x3
Then again, maybe there's something behind the scenes with FA that's more hard-coded or trickier to change with the username, like how image submissions have the username in the filename, so the file would either need to be renamed, or have pointers to the old username from the new. But then again, if you change your username, does the old one free up for registration (even if after a waiting period)? If so, then maybe pointers aren't quite that easy. Just thinking things out loud lol.
Would definitely be a nice feature, and probably the #1 most desired feature among users, but again also probably the #1 largest undertaking to change. Hopefully someday, I'm pretty sure I've seen that it is on the change roadmap!
Good to know it's IDs still! That'd imply it's a lot less headache.
I know usernames can be simple database referrals that'll route to the right thing, so something like FA.net/<database user ID to username retrieval>/<submission ID> (or vice versa). But it's just as likely that someone at some point started doing direct things with the username and ended up saving hard links, which has clearly proven to be a bad idea. Not something that can easily be fixed.
Anyway, sounds like it could actually be a complete fustercluck of code and DB design due to multiple developer iterations. This would mean it'd either have to be undone one step at a time, which could take forever and break so many things. Or it could imply that a full site/backend rewrite and a DB transform would be easier in the long run. What a nightmare.
Thanks for the response either way!
P.S: As a simple programmer/software developer, network engineers frighten me.
AFAIK yeah, still IDs! Though I think there's definitely some hardcoding going on there, hence it's been such a big undertaking. Sometimes I do actually wish I could peek under the hood, just out of pure curiousity!
Also why do we frighten you - is it because when we don't get what we want, we can cut your wifi like a kid's mom would do? X3 hehehe j/k
I think that's enough updates for one pee break. xD
Can't imagine what would be the next update. Browser games maybe?
. . .
On second thought, The water in my fridge sounds very enticing. xD
10/10 updates
Hopefully though we'll get this someday soon! I'm quite sure it's on the roadmap anyway. xD
Of course all existing links to users will break, and I highly doubt that you'd want to search up every user link through every submission/journal/comment just to make sure they still work. Alternatively have an automatic redirect of renamed users to the new one, though this becomes more database intensive over time.
And if you wanted it a bit more professional one could easily though possibly tediously have numerical IDs appended sorted by date creation, then just make usernames nothing more than an interchangeable variable. Put an arbitrary time limit on it to prevent abuse and you're done. I'm sure most sites do it like this.
Also if you do it with numerical IDs you can under the hood make sure that any links to other people will be saved as their numerical ID, but when editing it displays the name. This would future-proof everything.
Pardon the tangent, Inuki.
Honestly I'm curious about the same question, though I think it is really just a time of volunteers thing. And actually, FA does have numerical IDs under the hood - I only know this because years ago, the way the shouts section permalinks worked, you could actually determine your user ID from it. Mine (original username) was like 4451 or something, I joined FA within the first 4500 users x3
Then again, maybe there's something behind the scenes with FA that's more hard-coded or trickier to change with the username, like how image submissions have the username in the filename, so the file would either need to be renamed, or have pointers to the old username from the new. But then again, if you change your username, does the old one free up for registration (even if after a waiting period)? If so, then maybe pointers aren't quite that easy. Just thinking things out loud lol.
Would definitely be a nice feature, and probably the #1 most desired feature among users, but again also probably the #1 largest undertaking to change. Hopefully someday, I'm pretty sure I've seen that it is on the change roadmap!
I know usernames can be simple database referrals that'll route to the right thing, so something like FA.net/<database user ID to username retrieval>/<submission ID> (or vice versa). But it's just as likely that someone at some point started doing direct things with the username and ended up saving hard links, which has clearly proven to be a bad idea. Not something that can easily be fixed.
Anyway, sounds like it could actually be a complete fustercluck of code and DB design due to multiple developer iterations. This would mean it'd either have to be undone one step at a time, which could take forever and break so many things. Or it could imply that a full site/backend rewrite and a DB transform would be easier in the long run. What a nightmare.
Thanks for the response either way!
P.S: As a simple programmer/software developer, network engineers frighten me.
Also why do we frighten you - is it because when we don't get what we want, we can cut your wifi like a kid's mom would do? X3 hehehe j/k
As for network engineers? They're just powerful wizards dood, I can't do network things for shit. It's so obtuse to me, you're all miracle workers.
And lol awwr X3