Image Optimizer for XF 2.0 [Paid] 2.2.1

[Wanderer]

Even after:
1) installing addon version 3.0.0 and updating it
2) downloading the latest webp from https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/download and installing it
3) re-running the setup file
3) going through the addon's file path references for pngquant, jpegoptim, gifsicle and cwebp to verify they work and are updated

This add-on STILL deletes my image files, and in a way that prevents me from removing the broken images via the admin attachments interface, unless I manually re-create their missing *.data files.

Here's an example of the file deletion bug from the debug log:

2024-08-02 03:51:02 Process images $contentType=attachment_data $lastRunId=122774 $images=5
2024-08-02 03:51:02 Begin optimize $id=122775
2024-08-02 03:51:04 Truonglv\ImageOptimizer\ContentData\AttachmentData:nSuccess
2024-08-02 03:51:04 file_hash changed ed405e481ec1474d7418ca1ca2a99772 -> b05ecac977420436fc35c11c40f1704f
2024-08-02 03:51:04 Copying /var/www/html/forum/internal_data/temp/tio_TxFiTm1722570662886 to internal-data://attachments/122/122775-074a64ceeca98ce0868bf88454799256.data
2024-08-02 03:51:04 Truonglv\ImageOptimizer\ContentData\AbstractData::removeAbstractFile(internal-data://attachments/122/122775-074a64ceeca98ce0868bf88454799256.data)
2024-08-02 03:51:04 Truonglv\ImageOptimizer\ContentData\AbstractData::removeAbstractFile(data://attachments/122/122775-074a64ceeca98ce0868bf88454799256.jpg)
2024-08-02 03:51:04 Truonglv\ImageOptimizer\ContentData\AttachmentData:nSuccess -> OK

Note that it SAYS it copied to internal-data://attachments/122/.... but it doesn't actually copy the file. It will happily update the database with the new file hash of the file, it will happily delete the old version of the file... but it won't save the new version of the file.

 

[eva2000]

Even after:
1) installing addon version 3.0.0 and updating it
2) downloading the latest webp from https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/download and installing it
3) re-running the setup file
3) going through the addon's file path references for pngquant, jpegoptim, gifsicle and cwebp to verify they work and are updated

This add-on STILL deletes my image files, and in a way that prevents me from removing the broken images via the admin attachments interface, unless I manually re-create their missing *.data files.

Here's an example of the file deletion bug from the debug log:

Note that it SAYS it copied to internal-data://attachments/122/.... but it doesn't actually copy the file. It will happily update the database with the new file hash of the file, it will happily delete the old version of the file... but it won't save the new version of the file.

Wanderermaybe the deletion step can have a check to verify the file has been copied first?

 

[Truonglv]

I added it now.

TruonglvXF 2.3.0 has changed the way to get image path so it break the add-on now. I will release new hot fix soon.

 

[Truonglv]

Truonglv updated Image Optimizer for XF 2.0 with a new update entry:

3.0.1

Notable changes:

• Fixed file being removed

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[dn18]

Truonglv updated Image Optimizer for XF 2.0 with a new update entry:

3.0.1



Read the rest of this update entry...

TruonglvThis will work on XF 2.3.x only?

 

[Truonglv]

This will work on XF 2.3.x only?

dn18Yes. XF 2.3.0 changed a lot. I will give patch for XF 2.2 if possibles

 

[dn18]

Yes. XF 2.3.0 changed a lot. I will give patch for XF 2.2 if possibles

TruonglvThe same issue happens on the XF 2.2.x version of this addon as well.

 

[Truonglv]

The same issue happens on the XF 2.2.x version of this addon as well.

dn18Released new patch. Can you test with it?

 

[Truonglv]

Truonglv updated Image Optimizer for XF 2.0 with a new update entry:

2.2.1

Notable changes:

• Fixed files being removed. This version for XenForo 2.2.x only.

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[topas]

Hello. Truonglv, have you done any tests? What is the difference (in size) between Image Optimizer and the built-in solution in Xenforo 2.3.0? Is it advisable to use an add-on? Thanks!

 

[TD Perry]

Hello. Truonglv, have you done any tests? What is the difference (in size) between Image Optimizer and the built-in solution in Xenforo 2.3.0? Is it advisable to use an add-on? Thanks!

topasIf you want to compress JPG/PNG images, then you will need to use this add-on. If you want to convert/compress to WebP (which not all browsers can display currently) then you will be better served by the built in process.
Granted, it is only about 4% of the users that can't see them... but it's easier with JPG and everyone can see them.
Also, WebP doesn't support the higher megapixel sizes that PNG and JPG do.

 

[topas]

If you want to compress JPG/PNG images, then you will need to use this add-on. If you want to convert/compress to WebP (which not all browsers can display currently) then you will be better served by the built in process.
Granted, it is only about 4% of the users that can't see them... but it's easier with JPG and everyone can see them.
Also, WebP doesn't support the higher megapixel sizes that PNG and JPG do.

TD PerryI was interested in the size. Perhaps the final difference there is 2 times. And there's no point in enabling WebP, it's probably not as energy efficient as compressed PNG with image-optimizer. Maybe, perhaps. I haven't tested yet.
About WebP, seems all browsers support it https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/faq At least that's what they promise.

 

[TD Perry]

I was interested in the size. Perhaps the final difference there is 2 times. And there's no point in enabling WebP, it's probably not as energy efficient as compressed PNG with image-optimizer. Maybe, perhaps. I haven't tested yet.
About WebP, seems all browsers support it https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/faq At least that's what they promise.

topasAll major browsers currently do, but not everyone runs a current browser.
There are still users that their computer is running older versions of Windows.
WebP is not something that I'll be using on my site as it is largely photography based and many people like to download the images to use as backgrounds. It is easier to just keep them in the format they can directly use.