Leaderboard

Hi everyone, Every site I've launched eventually had a database incident — corrupted table, failed migration, bad deploy. Having a reliable backup system that runs automatically and stores offsite is non-negotiable. This module is what I use in production. GitHub: https://github.com/mxmsmnv/ProcessDbBackup What it does: Three independent backup types — Regular, Weekly, Monthly — each with its own LazyCron schedule and retention count Admin home widget — shows status (🟢 OK / 🟡 Outdated / 🔴 No backups) per type with "Create now" buttons Backblaze B2 upload — optional offsite storage after every backup, keep or delete local copy Chunked upload — upload .sql.gz from your computer in 2MB chunks, bypasses upload_max_filesize entirely Streaming restore — reads .gz line-by-line, flat memory usage regardless of dump size Partial restore — select individual tables from a backup Pre-restore auto-backup — safety backup of current DB before any restore Backup integrity verification — gzip check + SQL structure validation Lock file — prevents concurrent backup processes Exclude tables — skip cache, sessions etc. from all backups Storage protected with .htaccess deny-all Backup methods: mysqldump (preferred, InnoDB-safe hot backup) with PHP PDO fallback. Restore via mysql CLI with PHP PDO streaming fallback. Requirements: ProcessWire 3.0+, PHP 8.0+, zlib, PDO. mysqldump/mysql CLI optional but recommended for large databases. MIT License.

Hi Mikel and SEO specialist Thanks for taking so much time to list your thoughts. I completely agree, and it's a testament to both SEO Modules and ProcessWire itself that they have worked together for so long. I hope my original post doesn't come across as a criticism of either Module or the developers. Life moves on, and understandably, the developers have new priorities. Yes, agree too. And I don't intend to recreate existing Modules simply for the sake of it. But I also want SEO Neo to rely on other modules as little as possible. So it's likely that SEO Neo will act as an umbrella/coordinating layer for companion Modules. All working together. It's an ambitious task, but I would prefer to build from the ground up with modular components (sub-modules) that can work together rather than end up with a Module which relies on various "3rd party" modules. I realise this somewhat contradicts my earlier statement. But to answer your specific points: SEO health (missing descriptions, duplicate titles, noindex flags) as a Lister-based audit view – this genuinely doesn't exist in the ecosystem yet Yes, this is on the roadmap and has been on my mind for some time. The module should have an SEO health dashboard that can display the basic rolled-up audit of your site. I use SEM Rush extensively (alongside several other SEO tools). SEO Neo won't try to replace them, but will surface critical issues within PW itself. I see this as a big benefit to SEO specialists, developers and editors, even if it serves as a launch pad for deeper investigation via more powerful SEO tools. 404 hotspots from the logger with a "create redirect" action wired into ProcessRedirects Yes, this is being developed currently with a focus on 404 logging. AI crawler activity from Wire Request Blocker Have added to the roadmap. SeoMaestro field status across templates SEO Neo will have a field status overview if that's what you mean? It won't report on other SEO modules' gaps. Native urlSegments support – as psy mentioned earlier in the thread, currently needs a hook in SeoMaestro urlSegments is done and working since my last post. I am stress testing on a larger site shortly. Canonical, og:url, twitter:url and hreflang all preserve $input->urlSegmentStr() natively. I also have a config setting for sites that want segments collapsed instead. The hook needed for SeoMaestro isn't required in SEO Neo. Yoast-style content analysis with traffic-light scoring – tends to produce text optimized for the algorithm rather than the reader. I am keen for SEO Neo not to become a Yoast copy. Schema.org helpers with documented hooks – ready-made generators for the common types (Article, FAQPage, Person, Organization, BreadcrumbList) that developers can call from templates. Not auto-detection (that doesn't work without explicit mapping), but a clean API. Noted. Finally, the rollout of SEO Neo's core module and individual components will likely be phases. The Neo in SEO Neo is more a nod to a new approach rather than Nearly Everything at Once. P

AIOM is alive 🙃 I am pleased to announce that the AIOM module will be further developed and supported by @matjazp. My original repository is now archived, and matjazp's fork is now the official one. The forked version is now also listed in the Processwire module directory. This should make it possible for everyone to update the old version to the new one, either manually or via the ProcessWire upgrade module.

Hi Peter, thanks for taking the time to go through everything in detail – really appreciated. Good to see how much is already done or on the roadmap. Also, I really like your “Nearly Everything at Once” acronym for Neo. 😉 Looking forward to the phased rollout. Cheers, Mike

I assume you want those other RM types that should not be editable by the user with the given role still to be shown in admin, but with all their fields being disabled. The best way to achieve this is via hooks. Look here or search for similar topics for inspiration. Check RestrictRepeaterMatrix's source code for another example. You need to get the InputfieldRepeaterMatrix field at some point (maybe after the renderReadyHook method), foreach through the blocks and change their fields' output based on your conditions. Sorry for no ready-to-copy-and-paste code))

[manual] Sync "TracyDebugger" branch "master": 1121 remote, 987 local, 0 to update, 0 to delete (134 preserved via .gitignore/.gitattributes) Yep. Thanks for quick fix!

Hi Peter, great to see someone tackling this. SeoMaestro is solidly built and still maintained for bugfixes, but the last feature release was June 2022 and Wanze himself has mentioned he's stepped back from active PW work, if I remember correctly. A few things that come up in client work aren't covered by it alone. I showed your announcement to our SEO specialist and asked him to put together a wishlist. We then discussed it internally and stress-tested every point. What kept coming up wasn't really "we need new features" – it was "the pieces exist, but they don't talk to each other". There's already a lot of good, actively maintained tooling in the ecosystem: Wire Request Blocker (Ryan) – AI bot throttling since September 2025 ProcessRedirects (apeisa / teppokoivula) – 301s, wildcards, CSV import/export, v2.2.5 released Dec 2025 Process404Logger (kixe) – clean 404 logging SeoMaestro (Wanze) – the meta/OG/sitemap foundation everyone already uses The actual pain in daily work is that these live as separate islands. A site owner has to install four modules and configure each one in its own admin section. The obvious workflow between them doesn't exist either – a 404 logged by Process404Logger doesn't surface in ProcessRedirects as a redirect suggestion, even though that's exactly the kind of pairing that would save real time. So the honest question for SEO NEO might not be "what new features do we need" but rather: could SEO NEO act as the umbrella that connects what's already there? A central admin section that surfaces: SEO health (missing descriptions, duplicate titles, noindex flags) as a Lister-based audit view – this genuinely doesn't exist in the ecosystem yet 404 hotspots from the logger with a "create redirect" action wired into ProcessRedirects AI crawler activity from Wire Request Blocker SeoMaestro field status across templates Plus the few things that are genuinely missing on the meta-handling side: Native urlSegments support – as psy mentioned earlier in the thread, currently needs a hook in SeoMaestro Schema.org helpers with documented hooks – ready-made generators for the common types (Article, FAQPage, Person, Organization, BreadcrumbList) that developers can call from templates. Not auto-detection (that doesn't work without explicit mapping), but a clean API. What we deliberately left off the list: llms.txt generator – recent log file audits show GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot don't actually fetch the file. The spec is unofficial and no LLM lab has committed to honoring it. Worth revisiting if that changes. Yoast-style content analysis with traffic-light scoring – tends to produce text optimized for the algorithm rather than the reader. Whether the right path is one big new module or a coordination layer on top of the existing ones is your call. But from the user side, the bigger win would be coherence rather than yet another standalone tool. Looking forward to seeing where this goes. Cheers, Mike