ProcessWire 2.1 this or next week
#1
Posted 15 August 2011 - 11:04 AM
Initially, the 2.1 version will not include an upgrade function to go from 2.0 to 2.1. Instead, I'm treating that as a separate project. I want to get 2.1 released, and then focus on the upgrade utility for those that want it. If you are one of those that wants it, please let me know as I could use your help with testing.
I'll also be keeping the 2.0 branch going indefinitely for bug fixes and such.
I've reserved the "processwire" name at GitHub (per Adam's suggestion), so thinking about moving the 2.1 source over to that account. That means the GitHub account URL would be github.com/processwire rather than github.com/ryancramerdesign. I think this'll be a better fit for PW. Can anyone think of any issues with doing this? I'll of course update the README info at the ryancramerdesign account to point people over to the processwire account.
#2
Posted 26 August 2011 - 12:13 PM
Also wanted to mention that because we're very close on the final release version, and everything is quite stable, I've updated the Download page to steer people towards downloading version 2.1 rather than 2.0. At this point, I don't think there is any reason to start new sites in 2.0. But for people that are already using 2.0 and intend to stick with it, I will keep that version around indefinitely and fix any major bugs if they ever turn up.
#3
Posted 26 August 2011 - 02:04 PM
So far I'm really starting to love PW! I've done quite some things now and I just love how simple but very powerful this nice little software is. I'm prototyping a new website and it's just amazing how simple and fast the PW part is, so I can concentrate on the html, js and css. Building this way is actually fun!
github is great , I'm quite using it alot and I've just submited an issue to PW21.
I wish you and PW all the best for the future, and I hope many many other developer and designer will join "us"... let the crowd in
@somartist | modules created | support me, flattr my work flattr.com
#4
Posted 26 August 2011 - 02:14 PM
Let's put it this way, I'm even building a website with the wife now and she's happily been building page templates in PW and loving how easy it is. She's very IT-literate, but hasn't done too much with websites or web applications before, so it's still a testament to the the intuitiveness of the software that after only a 5 minute crash course on what things do from me she's picked it up already.
#6
Posted 04 September 2011 - 04:05 AM
I think that we need to solve the few issues left with file uploads and on issues list there is no "showstopper" issues left imo (many are "minor usability improvements").
#8
Posted 14 September 2011 - 03:02 PM
I don't yet have the Skyscrapers demo site updated to 2.1 (though it will be the first to use the upgrade script). I also want to get a video done that outlines everything new with 2.1 vs. 2.0. Once those are ready, I figured we would send off a press release to to all the applicable sites and get the momentum going.
Beyond the obvious user system updates, template enhancements and ajax uploading, are there any areas that you all think I should cover in the video?
#9
Posted 14 September 2011 - 03:56 PM
That's great news Ryan! I'm very happy to be here and help and support, and so lucky to have found ProcessWire by chance a few weeks ago. I think we will have a good time. Can't wait to see what happens when you give out official press releases.I did a silent soft launch of the PW 2.1 final version on Friday, and changed all the readme files and site copy to reflect v2.1 as the current stable version. So version 2.1 is now officially out as the current/recommended/stable version!
I don't yet have the Skyscrapers demo site updated to 2.1 (though it will be the first to use the upgrade script). I also want to get a video done that outlines everything new with 2.1 vs. 2.0. Once those are ready, I figured we would send off a press release to to all the applicable sites and get the momentum going.
BTW, I just convinced our CEO and COO at work to use ProcessWire for some of our next smaller projects and they're usually very hard to convince. But it was easy as pie with PW at my fingertips.
Beyond the obvious user system updates, template enhancements and ajax uploading, are there any areas that you all think I should cover in the video?
I think you should wait till I grab out my visual node based template/field editor...
@somartist | modules created | support me, flattr my work flattr.com
#10
Posted 14 September 2011 - 04:03 PM
#11
Posted 15 September 2011 - 09:09 AM
Great news. I think there are many small improvements also, like changes in admin from folding ui to tabbed layout (much cleaner), better admin search, lock icons in pagelist and gear icons in modules list, using latest jQuery in admin, new clone() function, better template caching... not sure if each of these are worth mentioning, but shows all the nice details that have been baked into P21.
Thanks Antti–great ideas. I'd even forgotten that some of this was specific to 2.1. I need to start keeping an official changelog.
#12
Posted 15 September 2011 - 06:26 PM
I need to start keeping an official changelog.
Doh!
#13
Posted 15 September 2011 - 06:39 PM
@somartist | modules created | support me, flattr my work flattr.com
#14
Posted 16 September 2011 - 12:53 AM
"Feature: added possibility to add template image"
"Bug fix: no more errors when editing templates."
"Major: users are now pages"
And probably should be like if there are any changes in commit that can break things, it should be in own branch and major version lift: 2.3, 2.4 etc...
#15
Posted 16 September 2011 - 07:39 AM
#17
Posted 07 October 2011 - 02:11 PM
#18
Posted 07 October 2011 - 03:23 PM
http://alternativeto...re/processwire/
And we could use some likes there. Though I guess the listing isn't yet officially approved, so not positive that link works yet (it does for me at least).
#19
Posted 08 October 2011 - 05:09 AM
I will try and write an objective review on both sites at some point - they're generally more helpful than overly-gushing reviews, but it might come across that way anyway as I can't think of a bad thing to say
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users













