Leaderboard

Good day, everyone! I am happy (and a bit scared) to announce the release of a long awaited new maintenance version for this module. @Mats blessed me to take control over the module. In fact, the repo is moved not to my github account, but rather to an org called Friends of ProcessWire in which there are some brilliant devs already, and maybe more will join. But that is a story for another post I am planning to write soon (a little intrigue))) As for now please test the new 3.0.4 version. It has some code merged from @ukyo (big thanks to him!) and a few lines by myself. I hope that this release does fix a few issues and hopefully not introduce new ones. But I can't be sure here, so changed the stability tag to Beta. Here is the changelog: Now the module uses https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org for all geocoding. Before it still used Google geocoding API in places. Fixed the issue with the map display in admin when the field is in the repeater or in the collapsed fieldset. There is still a problem with ajax tabs. Fixed ProcessWire namespace declaration. Fixed markup in README.txt. Executable bit is removed from all files in the repo. Git branches are renamed to be more familiar. The latest released code is now in the master branch again instead of PW3. The dev is used for current dev. Previously used branches are renamed and kept for now, though will be probably deleted in the future. Updated the module page in the modules directory.

@eydun Yeah, but it's a bit involved. ProcessWire expects its core files in the webroot and won't work properly if they're inside the vendor folder. What you can do is use Composer scripts to hook into the Composer installation and put all of ProcessWire's files in place. What I've done in the past is use a custom Composer script to download the latest version of ProcessWire from Github and unzip it in place. Something like this: "prepare-installation": [ "git clone --single-branch --branch dev https://github.com/processwire/processwire.git processwire-temp", "cp -r processwire-temp/wire public/wire", "cp -r processwire-temp/site-* public/", "cp processwire-temp/index.php public/", "cp processwire-temp/install.php public/", "cp processwire-temp/htaccess.txt public/.htaccess", "rm -rf processwire-temp", ], This can be run with composer run-script prepare-installation. If you want this to happen automatically during composer install, use post-install-cmd instead of a custom script name. There's probably a simpler way to do this, this was for a project template with a couple of other caveats.

I'm creating a new topic in response to @cst989's question in the RM thread as I think this is a common question and misunderstanding when evaluating RockMigrations. It's also easier to communicate in separate threads than in one huge multi-page-thread... Hi @cst989 thx for your question and interest in RockMigrations. This sounds like you have a misconception in your head which is quite common I guess. Did you watch my latest video on RM, especially this part? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6O859d3cFA&t=576s So why do you think it is a good thing to have one file per migration? I know that this is the way migrations usually work. But I don't think that this is the best way to do it. I'm not saying one way is right and the other is not. I'm just saying I'm having a really, really good time with RockMigrations and it makes working with PW in a more professional setup (meaning either working in a team and/or deploying PW to multiple locations and of course managing everything with GIT) a lot more fun an a lot faster and more efficient. If we look at how migrations usually work we can have a look at the other PW migrations module, which works just like usual migration modules work: You create one file per migration and you end up with a list of migrations that get executed one after another. See this screenshot from the modue's docs: In my opinion that screenshot perfectly shows one huge disadvantage of that approach: You don't see what's going on. You end up with a huge list of migrations that you can't understand on first sight. In RockMigrations this is totally different. You don't create one file per migration. You put all the necessary migrations where they belong and - in my opinion - make the most sense. An example: Let's say we want to add 2 fields to the homepage: "foo" and "bar". Ideally you are already using Custom Page Classes (see my video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D651-w95M0A). They are not only a good idea for organizing your hooks but also your migrations! Just like adding all your HomePage-related hooks into the HomePage pageclass init() or ready() method, you'd add the migrations for your 3 fields into the HomePage pageclasses migrate() method. This could look something like this: Now let's say we develop things further and realise we also need a "bar" field: Do so see what we changed? I guess yes ? Now one big difference to a regular migration approach is that you don't write downgrade() or reversion migrations - unless you don't want to revert the changes! In real life I've almost never ever needed to revert changes. Why? Because you develop things locally and only push changes you really want to have on your production system. If you happen to have to remove some changes that you applied on your dev it's easy to do, though: You see what we did? Nice! So does everybody else that has access to the project's GIT repo! So all your team mates will instantly see and understand what you did. Pro-tip: You don't even need lies 43-45 if you didn't push those changes to production! If you only created those fields on your local dev you can simply restore the staging database on your local dev environment and remove the migrations that create the fields. Pro-tip 2: Also have a look at RockShell, then restoring staging or production data is as easy as "php rockshell db-pull staging" Pro-tip 3: When restoring a DB dump from the staging system it can easily happen that you have data in your database that was created only on the remote and you don't have on your dev system (like new blog posts for example). If you then open those new blog posts on your dev system processwire and the blog post contains images processwire will not be able to show those images (as only the file path is stored in the DB and not the whole image!). Just add $config->filesOnDemand = "http://yourstagingsite.example.com" to your config.php file and RockMigrations will download those files once PW requests the file (either on the frontend or also on the backend)! Having all your changes now in your git history you can even jump back and forth in time with your IDE: You could. I thought about that as well. But I think it does not really make sense and I hope my examples above show why. I'm always open to input though and happy to try to think about it from other perspectives. One final note: I'm not sure if what you say about $rm->watch() makes sense here. If you watch() a file that means that RM checks it's modified timestamp. If that timestamp is later than the last migration that RM ran, then RM will automatically execute the migrations that are in that file. All other files and migrations will be ignored. That makes it a lot more efficient when working on projects that have many migration files in many different places. When triggered from the CLI though or if you do a modules refresh then it will always trigger all migrations in all watched files. I hope that makes sense! --- Ok, now really a final note ? One HUGE benefit of how RockMigrations works (meaning that you write migrations in page classes or in modules) is that you create reusable pieces of work/code. For example let's say you work on a website that needs a blog. So you create a blog module and in that module you have some migrations like this: <?php $rm->createTemplate('blogparent'); $rm->createTemplate('blogitem'); $rm->setParentChild('blogparent', 'blogitem'); $rm->migrate([ 'fields' => [...], // create fields headline, date, body 'templates' => [...], // add those fields to the blogitem template ]); You'd typically have those lines in Blog.module.php::migrate() What if you need a blog in another project? Yep --> just git clone that module into the new project and execute migrations! For example in migrate.php this: <?php $rm->installModule('Blog'); If you follow a regular migrations concept where all project-migrations are stored in a central folder you can't do that! Of course you don't have to work like this. You can still write all your migrations in the project's migrate.php file. Because I have to admit that it is a lot harder to build a blog module that can be reused across different projects than just creating one for one single project! It always depends on the situation. But - and now I'll really leave it for today ? - you could also make your Blog-Module's migrate() method hookable and that would make it possible that you build a generic blog for all projects and then you add field "foo" to your blog in project-a and you add field "bar" to your blog of project-b. Have fun discovering RockMigrations. I understand it can look frightening at first, but it is an extremely rewarding investment! Ask @dotnetic if you don't believe me ?

Would be nice to update the Fontawesome icons in PW core, so they can be used for labels in the backend. The current version 4 is quite old and has a very limit set of icons. Version 6 also has a free version with more icons. The implementation seems to be very similar, so it should be easy to implement. The icons can be downloaded here.

@elabx That seems like a major performance improvement (looking at the ms time at the bottom). And maybe it's about right. The only thing I'd mention is that the left join/null queries aren't really necessary for your Fieldtype since you are matching dates, and you can use field_name.count=0 to match non-presence of rows. So you may want to put in your own getMatchQuery(), like my earlier example, as that might optimize it further.

Awesome news, can't wait to try this. Thank you guys for the effort!!

Hey, today I saw this one in the github repo. A pull request named "Enforce sender in emails": ----------------- @eerojaaskelainen Greetings! My 2 cents: At least Outlook 365 accounts require that address in From-field must match with username. I've added a checkbox in config to override From-address to be the same as sender defined in configuration. Regards Eero J. ----------------- And he commited a PR there for. I have tested it and it works as expected, so I will merge this soon. Only thing I have to add is a) a small check with isset() for the new introduced $data['force_sender'], because otherwise PHP gives a warning about a not defined array key, when first time the config module is openend after the update to that version. And b), I have to update the module version and the change.log. ? So, many thanks to Eero! ??

This seems to imply that the version of FieldtypeFile in memory is still at 3.0.146, since getValidFileExtensions was added in release 3.0.167. Clean out site/assets/cache/FileCompiler and make sure that FieldtypeFile is in fact found at wire/modules/FieldtypeFile.

Ah, that's a different question then ? You can look into TracyDebugger's module disabler feature then. There might be some helpful snippets?

For those who just want to let users upload WEBP format and are looking for a workaround, here is a simple module that converts WEBP to JPG on upload: I wonder though... how is it that the user acquired the WEBP image in the first place? Surely they didn't just pinch it off somebody else's website... ?