Pete

I was going to write a reasonably concise comment, but there was a lot running through my mind and I have a tendency to go on a bit, so after much tweaking I've finished You can read the review at alternativeTo and it will pop up once it's been approved on opensourceCMS later on I imagine. I tried to credit the community as well, as aside from ryan's obviously fantastic work in producing this piece of software, there are a host of other modules and themes that I've enjoyed using these past few months as well as a lot of help that you guys have given me, so good work guys!

For US hosting I can't recommend Liquidweb highly enough. For cloud hosting, which suits me better on one of my higher traffic websites, I use their other company Storm on Demand. I use them because I've never had any real problems in the past several years with them, and it's managed VPS so I don't have to spend time installing modules or upgrading things. They're always happy to install modules for you on your VPS and do pretty much whatever you ask them to do. The bit that I really like though is that they proactively monitor their servers. Once when there was actually a problem and the server hit a fatal issue in the middle of the night, their monitoring software sent me an email saying there was an issue, had automatically rebooted the VPS less than a minute later and I was emailed once again once it was back up. Then a technician sent an email a little while later saying it was a hardware fault (this is on Liquidweb, so not the cloud hosting) and the faulty hardware was replaced very quickly. All the tech support emails to me occurred overnight and my site was down for no more than a few minutes at most - on other hosts I've experienced hours of downtime and it's often only when you get a client calling you that you even realise there was a problem to start with - that obviously doesn't look professional! They have their own datacentres too, with a new one finished recently and are showing no signs of slowing down, so I'm not worried they're going to disappear off the face of the planet one day either. For hosting my UK sites I use EUKHost. My experience with them is mixed on the support-front (seems to depend who you speak to at this company which I've experienced many other places too), but generally positive on their VPS offerings and the prices are very hard to beat. Their VPS packages are also managed and their staff are also happy to install anything you need - I even have several caching modules and FFMPEG on one VPS, the latter being something that not a lot of hosts will install as it can eat up quite a lot of system resources, but from what I can tell EUKHost don't oversell so it's not a problem. Another great company I've used before in the US is Site5. They're still going strong and the only reason I moved away from them and ended up at Liquidweb is because I needed a VPS at that stage and they didn't offer them at the time.

Done and done 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

Yep - it has since been fixed and works as expected, thanks!

I get that the website would be unusable without JS, but I also used to think that a site of mine was so small that it would never be spammed or attacked, and it was attacked and quite a lot of damage was done that could have been stopped by 2 lines of PHP validation on a form. Assuming you go as far as hiding the menu of the site somehow from thosevisitors without JS enabled, it's a simple matter of finding the page links via Google. It's also possible that spam bots or other more serious bots could crawl your site with JS enabled and then come back and attack with JS turned off. If I was going to write such a bot, that's the way I would do it so that with JS enabled it can find all possible attack vectors and then try and exploit them with JS both enabled and disabled at a later date. Not that I'd ever do such a thing (or even know how ). Unfortunately when building websites, I've learned to build them with nasty hackers in mind as well as my target audience. It's just one of those things, and many sites that get attacked are attacked by clever bots automatically, so it's not even as though it's a personal attack, just a real headache when it does eventually happen.

You should still have PHP validation - if someone disables Javascript in their browser to try and sneakily upload something they shouldn't be uploading then the jQuery validation won't take place.

Thanks Adam - didn't know you could do that

Hypothetically, would it be relatively easy to use the new fancy uploader in the front-end?

If you were only going one more level deeper to grandchildren then I would just nest your foreach loop once again with the specific markup for grandchildren. Recursion is the way to do it if you've got many more levels than that, or an unknown number of levels otherwise you could end up nesting almost exactly the same bit of code lots more times in your template, but you would have to have a counter to work out how many levels deep you are when printing a given title to know what formatting to apply to the title so I think in your specific case here recursion would just add unnecessary headaches and confusion. Alternatively you could well use recursion and if they're list items then you can use CSS to style them if you don't want to do massively complicated things at each level - for example (and this is just off the top of my head so may not work): <style> ul#mylist li { /* Your style here for the first-level (parent) list item */ } ul#mylist li li { /* Your style here for the second-level (child) list item */ } ul#mylist li li li { /* Your style here for the third-level (grandchild) list item */ } </style> So this way you could simply give your main list an ID of "mylist" and each level could have different formatting for the elements without having to code in different styles in your nested foreach loops. This is obviously only useful to style list items differently up to 3 levels deep though - I suspect that anything from the fourth level onwards would just inherit that last style above. Of course, this probably isn't much use to you as your situation seems to have a lot of different things being output at different levels - different siuze titles and different class names - but I thought I'd post it anyway

Seems reasonable to me If you had sub-sub-clauses then it would be best done with a recursive function that also keeps track of how many levels deep you are so you can alter the formatting accordingly (or just use CSS if you don't want the formatting at each level to be wildly different. Recursion hurts my brain though so I tend to put it off until I really need it.

Just spotted what looks like a simple typo - the POST field talks about GET vars and vice-versa.

Just noticed that when you're editing a page and you scroll down, a blue-ish 1px border seems to be present on the black header at the left and top edges. It only appears on this page though and only when you scroll down. Other than that I've been using it for the past two hours (very latest version) and I love it

+1 from me on these. When creating templates I have given them names on a couple of occasions and thought "why the heck did I call it that?" but then you have to delete it to put in a new one. I suspect it's because of selectors in templates, as changing the template name could easily break these, however if it gave you a warning when you change a template name (a javascript confirm() on template save maybe as that's more obvious?) then that would be fine. Also, I would like to call Pages something else like Dashboard so I can add more functions to it, so renaming those would be useful too.

In which case I'd use a normal database query - couldn't see any docs on the site after the briefest of searches, but this thread should help you out: http://processwire.com/talk/index.php/topic,23.0.html Since $db is all set up and ready to go it's likely more efficient to do it this way. Oh, but for total pages in a category that won't work will it? Erm... not sure how you'd do that - you'd need some sort of function to find all child categories and then use a query based on those IDs to count the child pages. Sorry, not being too much help here

That's a good point on the ordering - because I'm testing local they look like they're finishing at almost the same time, but I guess if there was maybe 30 seconds between the first one and the last one uploading (due to file size) it could actually be quite confusing if they suddenly re-ordered themselves. I think this was all stemming from me uploading up to 20 pages at a time so really the solution there is something we've discussed before which is multiple images per row to alleviate scrolling and make a but more use of the screen width rather than having to do a lot of scrolling which becomes a bit of a pain when reordering images.

I had a similar width issue on another skin when inserting images into the body field - possibly the same CSS issue.

I think pages->get would be getting everything - fields, images etc, so that will take some memory. I wonder if there's a pages->count instead?

I've got a few quick queries regarding multiple image uploading. Firstly, it seems to order them randomly when they're uploading. I'm not sure what you guys think, but perhaps if you select a large group of images they should be arranged in name order? It's obviously not applicable to every scenario, but if you're uploading photos for example you would often want to order them by date, and since digital cameras name them in order, ordering by name makes sense. Of course, you've then got a different problem if you upload 10 at once, but then an 11th one afterwards, so maybe if they're uploaded singly then add them to the end, but if there's a batch of them being uploaded at once then order by name? Just a thought - and I realise it's full of potential issues about what you would expect to happen in certain scenarios, but my first thought when selecting a lot of photos from my hard drive was that they should have uploaded and appeared in the same order. On a different note, I noticed that if you enter a description for images and save the page, when you insert them into the body of the page then they use that description by default. Is there any way that the descriptions can be passed before saving the page? From a workflow point of view it breaks the flow to have to save the page before inserting the images into the body so that the description is available when inserting images (and you don't want to have to type a description twice), so I was wondering if it is possible for the modal window to check the description field of the parent window if there is currently no description saved for the image you select? I suspect it's do-able with some jQuery magic.

Spotted an issue - if you insert a new image (as in one that's not already in the body field) and type in the first dimension it doesn't scale proportionally - just squashes the image. If you resize it first using the resize handle and then type in the dimension it works and resizes proportionally (all without inserting the image until the end). It seems like it's not able to work out the scale to change the other dimension accordingly until you grab and resize using the handle. It's not a problem if the image is already in the content and you edit it later, so it only seems to be an issue with newly inserted images. This is in FF5.

Here's a question I've been meaning to ask for a while. I'm going to have a few pages where there will be a number of images uploaded to it. Some of the images will be inserted throughout the content in the body field, however there are going to be a few occasions where there will be some images "left over", so ones not used in the body field. What I'd like to do on some pages is be able to output these in my template after the body content. So my question therefore is, is there an easy way to output only those images that are "left over"? For those that are curious, the context in this case is gaming articles where I sometimes get given 20 images or so and I place some in the page content in relevant positions and have the rest as "More Screenshots". (Of course, an easier way would be to move the left over ones to a different image field, but I was thinking their may be a relatively easy solution to using just one image field).

I just began linking bits of a site together so thought I should check out this module. It's great as it's very similar to how I've worked in another CMS, plus I do like the added bonus of being able to find out what other pages link to a given page which could be useful on larger sites where there might be a possibility of pages being deleted and causing broken links. Perhaps that might be a good addition to this module - a quick check on page delete to see if there are other pages linking to it first so the admin can then go and remove the links afterwards?

That sounds like a better way of doing it - thanks!

That sorted it - thanks! I'd thought to do a CTRL F5 on the main page edit screen, but if the main screen doesn't include that particular JS file then that wouldn't get refreshed - at least I'm guessing that's what it was. Thanks again - this is another thing you've managed to roll out just before I needed it as I'm going to be moving on to porting articles across (not that many, else I'd use an importer) and this will save a lot of time

Hi Ryan I've tried this but it doesn't do anything...? I'm using Firefox 5. I type a width in the box and nothing happens. In my mind, it should be changing the width automatically (and vice-versa if you type something into the height box) to keep the proportions in-tact, and also resizing the image in the insert window, but nothing's happening. Also, if I put dimensions into those boxes and insert the image it ignores them. I've definitely tested things more than normal this time - removed any custom admin themes so there's only the one in the latest commit so nothing's overriding it

Love this theme - only thing I changed so far was to make it fixed-width again. Obviously it's all down to personal preference, but it helps because my site is fixed-width too so if I have the TinyMCE fields around the same width then you get a better representation of how the text (which will be interspersed with images inserted trhough TinyMCE on some pages) will look on the live site. Also at 1600 pixels wide on my screen, some paragraphs of text just fit the full width and it made reading the content of some of the pages a bit hard for me. Just personal preferences like I say, and it was a simple CSS edit to change it to fixed-width.