User Profile Pages

Apr 2, 2010 at 4:20 PM

As I have mentioned in the roadmap thread, I have a plugin that I'm finishing up for the support of user profiles. My question is - do we want this sort of functionality to become part of the core codebase for Graffiti, or keep it as a plugin. The benefit of a plugin is that it provides a little more flexibility in the paths used for profile pages, but making it part of the core would potentially make it a lot more robust (like being able to have a more full-featured profile editor within the admin portion of the site).

There are three different ways we can go with this, and I would like input to see how people would like to progress with it:

  1. Keep the profiles functionality as a plugin
  2. Keep it as a plugin for 1.3, but work on integrating it into the core code for 2.0
  3. Integrate it into both 1.3 and 2.0

What do you all think?

Apr 2, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Initially it might be best to add this as a plugin and let the community review and comment on the functionality and feature set before adding it to the core (that looks like option #2).  I do believe that user membership/management/profile is very much needed though.

Apr 3, 2010 at 5:33 AM

I agree, keep as plugin for 1.3.

Apr 4, 2010 at 5:03 AM

We had serious issues with Community Server and user profile abuse, as the html in user bios could not be managed separately from site html.  This lead to SEO backlink spam as new users were created solely to pollute user bios with backlinks.  Just mentioning this to put in a call for full modularity of user profiles and user profile permissions, including html, etc., whether or not they exist as plug-ins or are included in the core.  The problems with CS led us to finally pull the plug and make a switch to Disqus for comment moderation and user avatars etc., and as I would probably prefer to stick with Disqus, a plug-in user profile (that could be left unplugged) seems best.


Apr 4, 2010 at 5:20 AM

One thing you need to remember is that user accounts only exist in Graffiti for your content authors, not people leaving comments and reading the site. Graffiti is not a social networking platform like Community Server, so you should be more limiting with who you give accounts to.

There is no "sign up" functionality in Graffiti, so the issues that you mention would be non-existent.

Apr 4, 2010 at 5:50 PM

I agree with what everyone has already posted here - lets leave it as a plugin for 1.3.

For 2.0 we can discuss how member management should be improved. I would like to see profile improvements integrated into core for 2.0, along with the option to use either a "CMS type" system with limited admin-created user accounts or a more community-esque site where registration is allowed.