Vanilla 1 is no longer supported or maintained. If you need a copy, you can get it here.
HackerOne users: Testing against this community violates our program's Terms of Service and will result in your bounty being denied.

Way to list all users?

edited May 2006 in Vanilla 1.0 Help
Is there a way to list all signed in users within a vanilla install? I want to be able to proivde a list so that other users can look and then click on the user for their profile.
«1

Comments

  • This should do what you want. Unless I'm reading your request wrong.
  • i was actually talking about a global list of all users, not just those who are online. but thanks for the link as this is neat as an extra which i will install :)
  • MarkMark Vanilla Staff
    http://lussumo.com/community/search/?PostBackAction=Search&Type=Users&UserOrder=Date
  • You confused me with your mention of signed in users.

    I nearly posted the search that Mark has done but I thought otherwise. Clearly that was remiss :P
  • ah great -- that simple! sorry i didn't work that one out myself (kicks shin)
  • hm... Mark... :)

    I don't think this type of showing all users looks good if you have MANY MANY users... a simple table like in phpBB would be better, I think... it gives the possibility to put the names in order (alphabetically, date registered and so on)...
  • MarkMark Vanilla Staff
    uzi: If you don't like doing it this way, write an extension to do it the way you want.
  • If you just search for users, so when you don't have anything actually in the search field, the listng doesn't tell you how many users there are.
    It says "1 to 30 of nothing" Is that a bug?
  • edited May 2006
    I wondered that, but then noticed that "nothing" doesn't stand for the total number of matches but for "no search term" (i.e., do a search for "a" to get all users beginning with a and it will say 1 to 30 of a), so technically not really an error, just a language misunderstanding.
  • mark: i'm not a coder, will start to learn programming next year ;)
  • BenBen
    edited May 2006
    It'd be nice to know how many results there were though, while you're flicking through with Next / Previous.
  • Yeah but that adds a ton of time on to the query which is why it doesnt at the moment. It wouldnt be difficult to do it's just mark doesnt want to.
  • Ah yes, that'd be why.
  • You should do it like Google does.. "1 - 20 of hundreds".

    or 1 - 30 of a lot. ;)
  • 1- 30 of ½ times twice the total.
  • MarkMark Vanilla Staff
    maybe "1 to 30 of all"?
  • Pfft, so conventional.
  • lechlech Chicagoland
    yeah, mark, that needs a condition for that type of search to display "all" instead of "none" :)
  • you guys are confused - the search page says "1-30 for nothing", not "1-30 of nothing".

    it's pretty clear to me that "nothing" represents the search terms.
  • lechlech Chicagoland
    /me gives ithcy a 1 for nothing :)
This discussion has been closed.