Actually, you can add NodeBB to your home screen already... should work on both Android and iOS.
However we don't show an alert for it because we find it obtrusive... I personally can't stand sites where I have to spend a couple seconds closing the two or three modals or overlays it shoves in my face when I want to read something, and that is reflected in how we don't do any of that in NodeBB.
Ah, yes, that is potentially a stumbling block... port property is optional, if not specified, NodeBB will listen on port 4567. However the url property is the one that is referenced by NodeBB, and is used as the canonical reference to itself... so when somebody asks your forum what it is to be called, NodeBB will respond back with the value in url, so the port is required if you are accessing your forum with port number in url.
I was on my way into the office one morning when I saw a link to the results of the 2017 Open Source Survey, released by GitHub. I'm almost certain I filled it out myself at some point, but seeing the summarized results was just as important for me, as our project is completely open-source and as such, any recommendations would be highly relevant to us.
... [the survey results] highlight some of the most actionable and important insights about the community.
The first commit to NodeBB was nearly four years ago, and in that time, many changes have been made to the core code itself, from feature additions and bug fixes, to bundling of must-have plugins for all installations.
As with any code that matures, schema changes needed to be made over time to ensure that stored data was kept in an ideal manner, so as to reduce the use of anti-patterns such as god tables and XYZ. The second reason schema changes are made are due to revisions in the original implementation. Perhaps a design decision from before could have been done in a more efficient way, and that may need a migration of active data from one data type to another (e.g. a list to a sorted set).
Yep, we jumped a minor version because there are a number of breaking changes. Technically, if there are breaking changes, we should increment a major version number, but after lengthy internal discussion, we felt that such a jump (from v1.0.3 to v2.0.0) would incorrectly signify that a whole bunch of things had changed, when this was really more of a "maintenance patch + a bunch of new features" release.