Pete

At the end of the day it comes down to skills, budget and what the client wants

Nothing quite that alarming, no.

Days at most - I don't recognise my own posts any more! I should start off with a blank-ish one and add something new to it every week. Mr Pete-ato head

*pictures Joss in a sparkly dress swaying and singing into a microphone*

If it's just a personal project that I just want to get out there, then sometimes I will use a pre-made template, but for clients I make something different each time. It does depend on skills, budget and timescales as well as whether or not the customer minds if you use a template that could be being used hundreds of times elsewhere. For a head-start I use http://getuikit.com/ (have used Foundation as well) but I tend to have an idea of where I want to take it from those basic starting blocks. I am by no means an awesome designer though

Have fun, it sounds like you are already

I always thought in your pic you were terrified of being pixellated from the bottom-left corner

Hi Mike - does this help: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17863112/ckeditor-move-skins-folder-somewhere-else ? I think that link is saying that using just / instead of using all those ../ will get you to the root of your site so maybe something like /site/modules/InputfieldCKEditor/skins/office2013 would work.

Yup - horst's solution or an autoload module would work, but I think his would be easier, quicker and upgrade-proof since config.php doesn't get altered during upgrades and has to be included whatever you're doing in ProcessWire.

Am I being boring too Maybe I need to switch back to the one with the fluffy scarf for a bit. With the hat so I can be more like Martijn. Better now? EDIT: Yes, we are all slightly crazy. Welcome to the internet

That's a rather encouraging list actually Peter, since workflow has come up as a bit of a hot topic recently and the rest aren't all that surprising I think. Certainly, most of those are already there in one form or another and would be adaptable for more complex team scenarios with a little work where necessary. A lot of requirements on the local government (or even national) side are exactly the same, but government are more likely to take into account the fact that it's free than Enterprise customers, though often arriving at polarised views - "Open Source? That sounds scary" versus "So it's free and we can do anything with the source code you say?" Custom dashboards is an interesting one because what that really needsin my opinion is for one Dashboard module that other modules can have a predictable function to output to the dashboard in some way. I can see how it would work, and it would work quite well, but it is also the least important on the list I think, though people are often persuaded by shiny things in my experience, especially if they're managers who just want reports at the touch of a button

Just realised the title of this topic should have been "people's choice" as the critic's choice entries are completely different and you could only nominate a system for these as of the 3rd september. So... go and nominate ProcessWire: http://awards.cmscritic.com/nominate/ I think the Critic's Choice ones are likely to be fairer as they're not based on sheer numbers. I just wrote what I hope is a compelling entry, so get submitting guys

The short answer is yes and no. What you can't do is run PHP or mySQL on a phone, but you can create an app that pulls data from an online database. You would likely be developing in HTML and Javascript if using Phonegap though and using AJAX requests to fetch the data from the website. The alternative is to create a static HTML site and package that as a phone app using PhoneGap or some other program, but that's a bit limiting. Setting up Phonegap took me ages as there are a lot of other things you also need to set up and the documentation can be a bit unhelpful in places (out of date instructions or bits missing when I last followed the instructions), but it can be fun once you get going - not something you would do unless you enjoy a challenge though in my opinion. The real question is: if this is a normal website then why have an app unless there is something special you want to do with the app? Making the website layout responsive would work just as well on mobile with less hassle, so I think we need to know a bit more about why you want it to be an app before being able to help further.

But modules can restrict you to one way of doing things, which is not what it's all about. There are also already blog modules and form modules, and a dozen ways to build forms and galleries. I guess it's that fine line between whether we want it to be a system people can use out of the box without having to learn anything and whether we want them to have to learn something about building websites. It's also whether it's even a good idea to let people loose without them having to grasp how things work - you're going to get queries about how to do things either way, but when they're potentially pigeon-holed by a module (not saying that would happen, but it could) and want it to do something else than what it's designed to then they're stuck. There's merit in both approaches, but I think continuing to roll out good tutorials and docs is the best route - that's just my opinion though. The "added value" bits you mention are the very core of the system - they're why you would choose it in the first place over pre-built solutions and how a lot of people arrived here in the first place. The whole point of the system is it's a blank(ish) canvas and you can do what you like, with a little HTML and CSS knowledge - there are plenty of website builders out there for those that don't want this. I don't think we should try to be like other systems. If there are people looking to build a site but don't want to learn even the very basics of the system they're using then they're going to arrive at a point sooner or later with any system they use where they will have to learn or give up, so why not land them with that choice right at the start? Sorry, I'm not trying to start an argument - just airing my personal views same as you and I know there are plenty of people who have been here a while who share your views and mine, sometimes both There is very likely some way to have it both ways, but I just don't see that catering to people who are unwilling to learn the basics helps anyone, at least not in the long run where they will be asking questions about customisation that we could have helped with right from the start. If anything it is a recipe for a recurring headache.

I do understand the user-friendly request, but I'm just concerned about how it can be done without making it not be ProcessWire any more. It's hard to make a bunch of templates when you don't know that the user is definitely looking for a blog or example - any templates that make too many assumptions will come with too many fields people won't use, and if you just stick with the default fields from the default installation but offer templates around that (there will be several with the 2.5 release coming soon) then those same people are still going to be confused even if they can see different template options The other option that has been talked about before is having several different installation profiles aimed at the question "what do you want to build?" with options like blog, company site, photo gallery etc and have some nice tailored options that can be installed at the start to show off different options. I think this is the more viable route as it offers choice rather than just theming the default template, plus is able to perhaps better show off some of the options depending on what someone wants. The rest of your points are easier to do, which is great! For Enterprise, I think we're getting the kind of case studies we can point to for those clients - the one I absolutely love being this one: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7494-case-study-the-triumph-of-national-geographic-traveller-india-in-processwire/ - big project, large team and high-profile client. And as a bonus they switched from another system after facing numerous hurdles which speaks volumes - that particular development team have experience with the tools they've used in the past but they still made that switch and left their familiar territory behind for the benefit of the project.

Hehe, you might find those karmic combinations come up more and more in future - there have been many occasions here where a feature or module is released just as several of us need it in projects In the early days I likened the experience of working with ProcessWire as being "how I would have built a CMS had I the time or skills to do so" because it seemed to solve all the problems I had as a matter of course whilst not getting in the say. It's remarkably intuitive once you get going with it and it's really a load off your mind, leaving you to build a site how you want. Having possibly the most active developer I've seen at the helm is a large part of that, as is his willingness to take on board suggestions (that sort of thing is often met with skepticism or resistance elsewhere whereas it opens up a valuable and rewarding dialogue here). Plus it makes working with a CMS fun again. That's a huge part of why the community is as good as it is

Thanks for sharing a really beautiful site with us! I like this project for so many reasons, but the main one is it is a perfect showcase of what you can do in ProcessWire with a little knowledge and time. 15 days to convert everything from Drupal to ProcessWire? Wow, that's quite something for this site. Did you have all the content already in Drupal so it was a case of moving everything over? Or was it more 15 days to get ProcessWire set up for all of the various content types and data entry came later? I know you can build things very fast in ProcessWire and with a dedicated team of people working on it it must be an even faster experience Again, a perfect example to anyone wondering what relatively-unknown system can do - certainly another site I will be pointing people to to allay any fears around whether ProcessWire is capable of delivering complex sites. Hope you don't mind, but I linked to the site a couple of times in your original post - once when you first mention the revamped site and also made the screenshot clickable to the site, just so folks don't miss it. EDIT: When you get to the 404 page, it says "NULL" in the top-left corner. I saw it due to a typo, so no broken links or anything like that

I'd noticed the field and used it, just not the bit where you can add multiple templates in order to be able to drop in different content editor "blocks" (I hate that term, but it fits here) in whatever order you like.

So behind the times @MadeMyDay - just submitted a pull request to fix some freaky things I was experiencing either due to a template delegation situation or some freaky admin code I've done but I think it could affect certain people in certain scenarios so best to be safe. And because I'm nice I made sure it was all still compatible with your instructions afterwards

I hadn't actually realised you could specify more than one template for a PageTable field! Did that get snuck in after one of the early versions or am I just blind in general? It actually makes an "article" system a lot easier to build where an editing user might want to dump in some text, then an image, then some more text exactly as you have, but with your module it's one step better as it's pretty much WYSIWIG. Inline edits would be nice as folks have said, but this is still really, really useful!

It doesn't have to be core - an optional module makes the most sense since it's not required by most. I think some minor changes could be required in the core to make it work, but possibly not all I know is that ryan has on occasion made changes to the core to allow for other bits of functionality but I don't expect this workflow would be a core addition. Either way, let's not fixate on it being core or not and keep the discussion more around requirements I'm short on time at present but I might break off all the workflow posts into a separate topic later today unless someone beats me to it (feel free mods).

I see it as being an addon module or modules (preferably as few as possible whilst being sensible about it of course) and yes, I think it's the sort of feature that could easily be a paid module, though I'd leave that decision to ryan.

Link 1 here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=processwire+logo+file

I had written a big post here about drafts/versioning etc a few days back but silly me was doing too many things, forgot about it and forgot to hit "Post" It went a little something like this: Drafts/versioning/workflows (let's just label all of those as workflows because they are all linked) is a feature that is usually required by larger sites/companies and is something that is actually worthy of the name "enterprise" that people have been using a lot recently. A system that I used 10+ years ago when working for my local Council had the following abilities (not saying we're behind the times by mentioning "10+ years ago", more that my memory won't be great when recalling the details ): The web team manager was able to edit certain fields (META data etc whilst the rest of the team was able to edit the content fields. This can already be accomplished in PW, but not sure how easy it is to use - ideal would be a tab when editing a template that has a matrix of all the fields and all the roles and checkboxes to determine who can edit/see which fields. Once web team user has finished editing, page goes to approval with team manager who can review the edits. These will quite often be changes to pages that exist already, so this is a draft copy of that page that has been worked on. There were also X past versions of a page (in PW this could perhaps be determined per-template again as some may need no drafts and others you might want a few) along with who edited them I think (10 years is a long time). Pages could also have a review period assigned to them. This would be a trivial module to build in ProcessWire, but the concept was that you would assign each page a review period of 6 months as well as the email address of the person best suited to review the content - this is NOT always a user account in the CMS. In the Council where I worked this person could be another department head and they would receive an email for each page on the relevant review date, with follow-up reminders. The ideal here would be for the web team leader and other suitable people to be able to log into the admin and see a list of which pages were up for review, who they were being reviewed by and they would remain in the list until either the content was updated or a box was ticked to add another X months to the review date. In theory there are multiple workflow steps that might be required - I think Concrete5 has the ultimate workflow solution here (I started the video at 40 seconds but not sure the forums will cope with that ): http://youtu.be/Z1fHz5jTnw4?t=40s but I'm not 100% sure a "version 1" would need to be that fancy. I can see how the interface might start to come together though as we already have things in the dev branch at present that deal with triggers and actions, I think something like that could be applied to per-template workflows. There isn't a huge audience asking for this, but there is a huge potential audience out there. The vast majority of medoum-large news/magazine sites could use this - having run a small one as a hobby it can become problematic to keep track of what's going on with just a handful of staff. Then there's just about every local government who are on the lookout for something powerful and cheap, but have to have the workflows in place for accountability (and sanity when dealing with lots of staff editing bits). And then there are large companies with lots of content to manage. Certainly I can see all of the above wanting to use ProCache too since systems with advanced workflows can often be of the slower variety. I don't want to sound melodramatic, but without a good, coherent approach to drafts/workflows/version control we are effectively shutting out a large audience. The problem is that it is easier for people reviewing a CMS to see what it's got, not find what they want and go elsewhere rather than saying "I'd use this CMS but it doesn't have feature X", so we will never know how many people might actually consider PW if it had workflows. (On a related note, can we set up the Site Search feature in Google Analytics for the forum and site search fields ryan - then we might get a better idea of what people are searching for but not necessarily requesting ).

I'm confused as to why you would want bots to be able to see your content if it's under maintenance but not guests? If you use my module, I would leave it so it blocks bots too otherwise Google could easily see a PHP error or something if you are changing things behind the scenes.