Jump to content

Pete

Administrators
  • Content Count

    3,816
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    54

Pete last won the day on March 14

Pete had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,583 Excellent

2 Followers

About Pete

  • Rank
    Forum Admin
  • Birthday October 4

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Buckley, Wales

Recent Profile Visitors

36,799 profile views
  1. Have replied via PM, but for others who are in the same boat the system still doesn't seem to be correctly promoting people from the Starter group to the Members group so I will look into that.
  2. Most of the styling issues are where UIKit for the new PW header is conflicting with the forum software styling. I'm actually surprised it broke as little as it has to be honest but will get onto these theme issues in the next day or two.
  3. Yep, spotted those so will look into them as I get time.
  4. I've just upgraded the forums to the latest version 4.4.x as there was a critical security patch that warranted it. As usual, there is some pain in upgrading from a 4.x to 4.x branch due to template changes and feature changes/additions so you may find things have moved around a bit. There is still work to do on the template as this was a little rushed (security update forced my hand) but it should be functional at the very least. If you spot anything drastically broken that I may have missed, please let me know here. Minor template tweaks (fonts, alignment etc) will be updated in the next few days.
  5. Hi folks Does anyone here have any experience building Windows apps? I have a requirement for a bespoke data transfer tool (from Windows PC to FTP and cloud, resumable upload if connection is lost etc) and can't seem to find anything out there that meets my rather unique requirements. PM me if interested and I will explain more
  6. Pete

    ED works new site

    The amount of time I've lost to this in the past
  7. I'm sure we can get an "updated" JSON response set up no problem once we get the feed code altered on the modules directory as well. Not heard back from Ryan about that yet so will give him a gentle nudge
  8. I can take a look at it - what data does it need to pull? Just the same as is in the current feed? I think the only issue is that depending on the version of PW you run it dynamically filters the modules somehow on the PW server - I'll ask Ryan if it's okay to share the code so you can see what's going on and I'll get back to you.
  9. That makes sense. As others have pointed out to me as well it's not a huge amount of data at the moment either, especially if you are just grabbing the essentials to start with and then if we wanted to do anything fancier like grab the readme then that can be a request when you go to view a module's details maybe. The modules that are on Github - it's down to the user whether they have a readme.md file so I guess that's a bit hit and miss. For non-Github modules in the directory they have an "Instructions" field we can get that data from. I think what this might highlight during this process is how many modules there are with no instructions that are able to be fetched from the server - in which case we can get a list together, nudge the authors and tighten up the submission process - I don't mind forcing either instructions or a basic readme file - not sure what everyone else's view is on this?
  10. There are enough logs to show that the user has used the forgot password tool in the forums which isn't the action of a bot. They also passed the validation when joining and I also checked on stopforumspam.com manually. Aside from that, which rules have been broken? It is annoying to be sure not to receive any thanks, but the easiest thing to do here is simply not reply.
  11. Theoretically I guess pretty easy. But what I also think it would be nice to do is to be able to click on a module and view the instructions and other readme data without leaving the PW admin which is where the data would balloon massively if it were in one large file. I guess that could be a JSON file per-module for the more detailed information as they would get called less and all of these files could of course be generated when the module gets updated in the directory. You raise a good point on modules that aren't in the directory - I guess it's more incentive for people to add them
  12. I don't think interactive requests are out of the question either instead of relying on static JSON on the server, but I can see the benefit in separate cached JSON files on the server for category totals and all the modules per category in the short term.
  13. I'm wondering if it needs to pull down data for all files in one hit anyway? If it starts off with categories and totals and just the first XX amount of modules listed by default it could fetch the rest as the filters/searches change surely? It would mean a change to the code on the modules directory but I'm happy to look at that for you - maybe set up a separate feed for our tests if you only want to pull a small amount of data until someone clicks on a module for more details.
  14. I'm absolutely in awe at the speed you two are working at. I feel like a snail in comparison It's a separate thing so not one for right now but some similar code would be involved - the installer could do with reworking to allow easy presentation and installation of site profiles a bit like you can install a WP theme easily. You should be able to choose a site profile during installation (maybe thumbnails for each and click to popup the information about what it is and what it contains along with any caveats) and make that side of things easier too. I'm far from the only person to mention this, but I do know it's been mentioned for so many years now off and on and it lowers another barrier for entry in that people get to code that's relevant to them that little bit quicker. I think that one change, albeit not a simple one, would lead to more people producing site profiles as the current steps involved are again more numerous than they could to be and site profiles aren't paticularly visible as they are lumped with other modules in the directory. Also a note to say you guys probably want to make sure your tweaks to the modules interface don't show site profiles from the modules directory or that could get confusing.
  15. The reason for "rebuilding" the categories layout into the module (though it's not a hard build to be honest) is that it lowers the barrier to entry further. It's just a convenience thing, but also a way to prevent new users having to go back and forth straight after installation. It's also how some other CMS's do it so it would also be intuitive for those users and just a nice bonus for the rest of us. I guess they will need to go to the PW site anyway for things like docs, but I think installation and setup should be made as simple as possible ideally. Nothing about the current setup is hard of course, but less clicks and easier/quicker module discovery would be a nice bonus - I'm a PW veteran and I honestly don't scour the modules directory for new modules often, but if there were a feed of recommended or new modules within PW itself that would help lazy people like me to not overlook things like Tracy
×
×
  • Create New...