Is there a Gitlab SSO plugin? Would be really cool

I have tried forking OAuth SSO and adapting it for Gitlab: https://github.com/rfc2822/nodebb-plugin-sso-gitlab but it didn't work well …

Please don't use Chrome to workaround this.

It's just that html.composing body.page-topic.page-topic-13568.page-topic-dark-theme.page-topic-category-10.page-topic-category-nodebb-themes.page-status-200.skin-paper div.composer.resizable.reply div.composer-container div.row.write-preview-container div.write-container textarea.write doesn't have background: white, as you can see in the excellent Firefox DOM inspector. In the NodeBB stylesheet, textarea has color: inherit, but no background: inherit. So the browser stylesheet for textarea's 'background' is used, which is the theme background by default, which is dark in this case.

Some digging shows that these values come from normalize.css 3.0.2. Seems like this is the same problem as this one: https://github.com/necolas/normalize.css/issues/469

This has been fixed in normalize.css in Jan 2016 by removing color: inherit. In the case of a dark background (coming from the Gtk theme), the text should now be white (or whatever the Gtk theme says) instead of dark, which makes the text readable.

Suggested fix: use a version of normalize.css later than Jan 2016

PS: Maybe Chrome is just not able to show the dark Gtk theme? Could be an enhancement request

clottes created this issue in necolas/normalize.css

closed Input text not visible in cases due to color:inherit #469

@PitaJ Was the sharp dependency added in 1.10.2? sharp requires libvips, and the FreeBSD libvips port wants to install X11 here…

Hello,

When I just wanted to update 1.10.1 to 1.10.2 with the same procedure as always, it failed and NodeBB told me that I should manually install libvips (FreeBSD). So I tried to build libvips, but it wanted to install ~ 100 packages for an X server, which I don't want to have on my server. Is it really required to have X server code now just to install the dependencies for NodeBB and has this requirement been introduced in 1.10.2? Is there a reason for that?

Can I help making this dependency optional?

@artesea Currently, the Apache Solr plugin is working here very well. It requires a Solr server, which quite large and runs in a VM here, but it's really worth it.

@bri Searching a manageable number of postings (which should contain real text content, mostly without markup and all about a certain topic) should still be easier than indexing the whole Internet (and rank an endless number of pages which are highly "optimized" with SEO to be shown first etc.) Also, things like PageRank are not really applicable to a forum because a posting doesn't have to be linked often to be valuable.

Just had an idea: with Solr, even attachments (of postings) could be indexed

@bartvb said in Default search, Solr, importance of full-text search?:

@rfc2822 My guess is that the NodeBB project gains the most when nodebb-plugin-dbsearch is improved. I did a quick check of the MongoDB docs and it seems like there is quite a bit of room for improvement when it comes to the implementation of MongoDB fulltext search in NodeBB.

My experience with database full-text indices is bad. MySQL has a full-text index, too, and I have used it for several projects. It's OK, but the results are not as good as from specialized search engines as Solr. It confirms my prejudices when looking at what the default NodeBB Mongo-based full-text search produces. I also remember what happens when other projects (CMS like Typo3) try to build their own full-text search. It's just horrible and at the end, you still have to use a public search engine with site:.... to find what you're looking for.

Good full-text searching is an extremely complicated task. Why not leave it to specialized projects? I just don't understand why every project needs its own unusable low-quality full-text search instead of

• making use of public search engines (in the end, this is what most people do – redirect to Google), and
• making use of already available, specialized open-source search engines like Solr and Elastic Search if this is not an option?

Of course, the MongoDB full-text index could still be available, but not as only officially supported and advertised solution.

In my opinion, a side project of a database ("oh yes, full-text index would be cool, let's add it quickly") can never provide acceptable results because the topic is too complex. I also guess that the people who have developed Solr are not idiots who like to waste their time for nothing. (Ok, this applies to MongoDB people, too, but maybe the MongoDB full-text index is for use cases where high-quality full-text search is not as important as for a forum.)

For reference: https://github.com/julianlam/nodebb-plugin-solr/issues/34

rfc2822 created this issue in julianlam/nodebb-plugin-solr

closed New postings are not indexed #34

@bartvb I have just tried Elasticsearch. The default Elasticsearch plugin included by NodeBB doesn't even allow to (re-)index all posts … which means manual importing. No …

The question is: shall I try to improve the Elasticsearch plugin, creating the 10-th unmaintained fork which is then working on a single instance (mine) until the next major NodeBB update, while overall search is still horrible for 99% of NodeBB users? That's what I wanted to avoid. But it seems like interest in working full-text search is quite low

@julian said in Default search, Solr, importance of full-text search?:

That said, if Solr was working fine for you, and it wasn't indexing, then there was something wrong with the configuration... it should automatically index new posts, just like dbsearch does.

Well it didn't, although it said the opposite (I even tried to turn off the setting to be sure)

So… is there any chance that full-text search will be re-thinked again in NodeBB and my suggestions will be taken into consideration? Shall I open this topic elsewhere (issues, mailing list, …)