The Portable Freeware Collection Forums

Two new features have been implemented:

1) The "Alternatives" field request by spicydog is now online. For examples, see this and this.

2) guiness wants a way to count his submissions with the new website design. He can easily do it now with:

"[@guiness]" = return all guiness' submissions
"[#guiness]" = return all guiness' private submissions

Here's a summary of _all_ the special search commands currently available:

"[@]" = return all public + private entries
"[#]" = return all private entries only
"[username]" = return all username's favorites
"[@username]" = return all username's public + private submissions
"[#username]" = return all username's private submissions

Great! Thanks!
Is it already implemented? I get "guiness's submissions (0)" when I search for "[@guiness]".
If I search for "[@lautrepay]" I get the entries that I recently updated.

Is it already implemented? I get "guiness's submissions (0)" when I search for "[@guiness]".
If I search for "[@lautrepay]" I get the entries that I recently updated.

Should be working now. Please try again.

Perhaps this block could be added to the Detailed Search page, under the Search button.

Andrew Lee wrote:

Is it already implemented? I get "guiness's submissions (0)" when I search for "[@guiness]".

Should be working now. Please try again.

I'm getting this too. Maybe guiness has too many submissions for the system to handle.

But if I do "[@Firewrath]", it seems to work. O_o
(Not that I've submitted much >.>)

It's because my user name is guinness! People always forget the second n.

Thanks for adding Andrew, I had no idea you had added 288+ applications to the database.

Rofl... ^-^;;

I blame Andrew! I just used what he had!

Andrew Lee wrote: "[@guiness]" = return all guiness' submissions
"[#guiness]" = return all guiness' private submissions

Andrew Lee wrote:

Is it already implemented? I get "guiness's submissions (0)" when I search for "[@guiness]".
If I search for "[@lautrepay]" I get the entries that I recently updated.

Should be working now. Please try again.

Working fine now, thanks!

Firewrath wrote:Rofl... ^-^;;

I blame Andrew! I just used what he had!

Andrew Lee wrote: "[@guiness]" = return all guiness' submissions
"[#guiness]" = return all guiness' private submissions

Lol I did the same

Great features. TPFC keeps getting better.

And who are the Top 10?
Some candidates: Andrew Lee, guinness, Fluffy, I am Baas, Checker, AlephX, joby_toss, technicolordreamcoat.

Great additions ... Thanks Andrew

If I search with [@Checker] the entries for

- CurrProcess [25]
- ExeInfo [15]
- Access PassView [11]
- Celestia Portable [20]

are flagged "Private"

tproli wrote:Perhaps this block could be added to the Detailed Search page, under the Search button.

But these are features I don't want the casual passerby to use.

Checker wrote:If I search with [@Checker] the entries for

- CurrProcess [20]
- ExeInfo [15]
- Access PassView [11]
- Celestia Portable [20]

are flagged "Private"

These are unflagged, no? Public entries that are older than 3 months are unflagged. Private entries will always be marked "Private", regardless of age.

Andrew Lee wrote:These are unflagged, no? Public entries that are older than 3 months are unflagged. Private entries will always be marked "Private", regardless of age.

No, they are flagged "Private", but they shouldn't, that's why I added the voting points.

If you search them direct, every thing is o.k., but if you search with "[@Checker]" (selection: 5 per page) you will find them on page 13 all flagged with "Private"

Checker wrote:

Andrew Lee wrote:These are unflagged, no? Public entries that are older than 3 months are unflagged. Private entries will always be marked "Private", regardless of age.

No, they are flagged "Private", but they shouldn't, that's why I added the voting points.

If you search them direct, every thing is o.k., but if you search with "[@Checker]" (selection: 5 per page) you will find them on page 13 all flagged with "Private"

Confirmed. In addition, I found another problem: the list includes InjectedDLL which is a private entry. However, it's flagged as "Updated".