Suggestion for Modify of your last post

[4wd]

This is possibly of more use in the Coding Snacks area but I'm wondering how hard it would be for a feature to be added to the post modification function which would check to see if any posts had been made since your last in the thread and if it was none it would treat your modification as if it were a new post.  ie. It would only work if the last post in the thread was being modified by the poster.

My thinking is that currently you have to bump a thread with a reply in order, for example, to announce an update to a program, so that it's moved to the top of the forum so that anyone interested can take note.

My idea is if you were the last poster, you could change attachments, feature list, bug extermination, etc and this would be seen by the system as a new post and bump it automatically to let people know.

It just seems neater than having a run of posts by the same poster saying there's a new update.

An arbitrary expiry date on the feature would probably also be advisable, eg. 14 days, after which any modifications don't automatically bump the thread.

Does this make sense?

[Ath]

Yep, this does make sense, but chances are big you won't be the last poster in the thread, so you'll have to make a new post after all...
And then, making a new post with a (short) change-log or What's New, is also informative for more or less novice users of your utility. They can see what changed since the last iteration, and be quickly updated, not needing to indulge the entire previous changelog, remembering what was there before, and trying to filter out what you just added... Kinda like skwire tends to do with his many releases and updates.

A combination of both could also be quite user-friendly: Update the original release-posting with all the extra features and options you have (you have it summed up in a readme, right?) *and* make a new post with just the stuff added this time.
This is the way I have planned to keep my March2011 fundraiser release up to date

[mouser]

On second read-through i understand what you are saying..

When you say "treat your modification as if it were a new post" you mean just for the purposes of bumping it to the top and sending notifications.. Yeah let me give that some thought.

It just seems neater than having a run of posts by the same poster saying there's a new update.

that's a pretty good point.

What's the logic in not doing this if someone else was the last poster?

Update the original release-posting with all the extra features and options you have (you have it summed up in a readme, right?) *and* make a new post with just the stuff added this time.

-Ath

this is what i do, i update the first post and change the subject to signify the current release version number and date, and then make a reply post with the changelog for the latest release.

[4wd]

A combination of both could also be quite user-friendly: Update the original release-posting with all the extra features and options you have (you have it summed up in a readme, right?) *and* make a new post with just the stuff added this time.

-Ath (February 28, 2011, 03:36 PM)

The reason I thought the last post was because when you hit the Last Post icon, that's where you go.  Whereas, if you modify your release post, people would still need to jump to the last post and then back to the release post.

I'm sure there's a compromise/rational solution in here somewhere, just not sure what it is.  Maybe like skwire has done it with his Launching Pad except instead of a forum per coder, just a general forum where anyone who has written a program can start a thread with his/her own Launch Pad and can update it which would trigger it into being a New Post but users would reply back at the original thread.

(you have it summed up in a readme, right?)

 Sorry, being a typical male I'm instruction-agnostic - just ask my other half

What's the logic in not doing this if someone else was the last poster?

-mouser (February 28, 2011, 06:47 PM)

Because alternating posts read more like a conversation.

Current method for with OP replying to himself.
OP: I've release project X v0.1, see if there's any bugs.
(Couple of days later with no reply)
OP: Update X v0.02, fixed yaddayadda.
(Still no comment a few days later)
OP: WTF, it just nuked my drive!  Don't use it!

That reads like a monologue, no indication of anyone taking any interest.

What I suggest.
OP: Release project X v0.01, have fun.  (Modified a couple of days later after no posts and promoted to New Post status)
      Release v0.02, fixed drive nuking bit.  Surprised no one caught it.
New poster: Hey thanks for that, you saved all my backed up GMail.  (Maybe a month later)

That reads more like a conversation, interaction between users.

I don't know about you but if there is a string of consecutive posts from the same person, I tend to read the first and then jump to the next person unless there's something interesting referenced back to one of the first persons' other posts.  (Read it slowly, it does make sense......kind of.)

this is what i do, i update the first post and change the subject to signify the current release version number and date, and then make a reply post with the changelog for the latest release.

Crap, I just noticed you could change the subject - still it's not something I like doing unless I'm the one who started the thread.
Remember I was talking about this more for the Coding Snacks area where the threads are started by others.

[MilesAhead]

Does seem like there should be some way of signifying a post has been edited with new information though.  In the general case if you cannot add another reply(say you already have your software listed in a thread about programs that will run on a particular OS.)   If you edit with new info like a version update, nobody knows. It keeps its position in the thread.  Everyone only looks at the tail end.

Seems like there should be some kind of button to take you to the last edited post or something. Don't know if the logistics support it though.

[MilesAhead]

Crap, I just noticed you could change the subject

I thought you could only do that if you're the thread starter?

[4wd]

Crap, I just noticed you could change the subject

I thought you could only do that if you're the thread starter?

-MilesAhead (February 28, 2011, 07:34 PM)

You're right, just tried it.

It only changes the subject of your reply, so if you didn't start the thread it's useless in respect to what I'm suggesting.

[MilesAhead]

Crap, I just noticed you could change the subject

I thought you could only do that if you're the thread starter?

-MilesAhead (February 28, 2011, 07:34 PM)

You're right, just tried it.

It only changes the subject of your reply, so if you didn't start the thread it's useless in respect to what I'm suggesting.

-4wd (February 28, 2011, 08:33 PM)

I wonder if there'd be a way to have a button on the edit such as "Save and Update" or something like that.  I know if I'm correcting spelling or grammar I don't want it to show as a new post until I'm done making edits.  Sometimes I edit 4 or 5 times to get it right with typos.

[4wd]

Sometimes I edit 4 or 5 times to get it right with typos.

-MilesAhead (March 01, 2011, 08:22 PM)

Don't you mean: "...get it right without typos." ?

[MilesAhead]

Sometimes I edit 4 or 5 times to get it right with typos.

-MilesAhead (March 01, 2011, 08:22 PM)

Don't you mean: "...get it right without typos." ?

-4wd (March 01, 2011, 10:02 PM)

Without the typos I wouldn't have to edit. Kind of like cops being without a job if there's no crooks.

edit: see I didn't really have to edit this one because I got it right without typos.