Pete

Great minds think alike: http://processwire.com/talk/topic/2374-batch-allow-template-edit-access-to-new-role/#entry22423

I think this is what it all boils down to. The API actually means you're not altering/editing/refactoring any of the core code of ProcessWire. All modules simply leverage the functionality of the API rather than modify the codebase and I think that helps you get out of those grey areas. Section 2 of the GPL is where a lot of confusion stems from I think, but it refers to modifying the core program (ProcessWire) and your modified work then needing to be licensed under GPL rather than modules. I think these two paragraphs definitely apply to modules since they don't alter core code or copy core functions, but are in fact original works that simply reference the API functions so are exempt from section 2 as far as I can tell: The way I've read this, you aren't required to distribute commercial modules with a GPL2 license and actually shouldn't otherwise others can redistribute them freelyunder GPL2. Looking at the FormBuilder module readme.txt file ryan has wisely not distributed it under GPL. In fact after looking at the code he has gone to some lengths to ensure that all code for FormBuilder is packaged with that module and isn't borrowing bits of code from the source of ProcessWire itself, so as with other modules it simply interfaces with ProcessWire via the API and leaves the source alone. Going back to the last paragraph I quoted at the start of my post, ryan is also quite correct in that you use the API not only when building modules, but also when building the templates for a website and you are not expected to have to redistribute your website under GPL so I don't think it necessarily applies to modules either since you are using the API the same way in both instances (for those that don't know, you could easily recreate the functionality of some modules inside templates and the code would be identical in places - it's just neater having large chunks of code in modules where appropriate). I think my train of thought has arrived at the station. Not sure it all made sense, but from what I understand ryan has been quite clever with the API in that it grants quite a degree of flexibility when it comes to custom modules and licensing.

There are a few issues here that I think have been discussed before - the settings tab for a page also contains the page name field /your-page-name/ so you can't really do without it (what if a client changes a page title completely after creation for example? The page name won't update itself - and rightly so as it is the URL so you don't want to assume that the URL should change itself if that URL has been indexed by search engines). It also contains the visibility settings for the page, so if they accidentally publish a page instead of leaving it hidden after save then they would have no way to un-publish it again without that tab. There are also things like template selection in that tab that can be useful to editors/clients... in fact, everything on that tab could be useful for an end user I don't think it should be able to be hidden, but rather the end user should be informed what the features there actually do.

Hey Ollie There are a few MODx Evo developers here including myself. Are you able to give a bit more info about the projects in question? You can contact me via PM if you like.

I like that he hasn't even specified valid code, just gobbledygook code - surely this means you can just mash your keyboard for a few hours and pass it over?

I've read a few Larry Ullman books and loved them when I read them - easy enough to follow

Let us know if you run into any issues or need to ask how to do something the "PW way" - usually you'll get a quick response and that certainly helped me transition from MODx to PW a few years ago

I believe he means Deutsch site, which loads fine for me. That or he wants to populate douche.processwire.com?

The only thing I would add to this idea is that, whilst it's possible to achieve, if you were aiming fir millions of users and many page relationships you would soon rack up a large database so would need to make sure that your PW selectors are well optimised and that your server can handle the traffic. Technically it is possible but if it takes off and you're aiming at tens of thousands of users or above there are some other considerations is all I'm saying

Also worth noting is that porl has created a Twig module here: http://processwire.com/talk/topic/1421-twig/?fromsearch=1 and there is a Smarty module somewhere on the forums recently too so you could try both of those out. I can't see either being the default though because the system is designed to make few/no assumptions about the end user, but there are a few options there at least

This isn't meant to disagree with what you've just said, more just understand the processes people follow when working in teams. Why would you let your designer work on templates in your final system at all? The way I do it when working on my own sites is to build templates separately and then copy and paste the HTML into the ProcessWire templates, which to me seems sensible over letting a designer do tweaks on the actual system. Where I've worked in a team this was also the preferred way of doing things - the dev would be the one to actually insert the final HTML into the template files. This is definitely more about me not knowing other people's processes than anything else though so please do weigh in with your experiences. The other thing to bear in mind is that even with a templating engine they could still type PHP into the template files so it wont stop them, but on the bright side if you don't tell them they can then they're less likely to do it And welcome to ProcessWire Anthony.

I wonder if that is a recursion issue.

I've done it with a few MODx Evo sites too and plan to convert more when I have time, but mine were only up to a dozen pages in that case where it's probably easier just to copy and paste the data once you've got the structure sorted in ProcessWire. Like SiNNuT says, if you give us more details I'm sure we can help further.

This should all be sorted now and, although you won't spot any cosmetic changes, some of those bugs people were encountering should be gone as well (fingers crossed!).

Okay, the editor is back again so we can use the forums (hurrah!). Here's a quick update - I've had to hardcode a setting into a JS file to get it working, so looking through various things and the fact that there are still a few invisible errors behind the scenes I think there's something wrong that's taken hold during a past update and each update is making it slightly worse. As such, I'm going to pass it over to the devs to look into now to see if they can find the cause and sort it out. In the meantime, I don't think any of the other errors people have been reporting will have been fixed, but nor should they hopefully be any worse. In short, the core code is up to date and we're all secure, but the user experience is no different than before until I get to the bottom of this.

REALLY infuriatingly something has gone wrong again with the editor. It works locally, it doesn't after uploading. I'm trying to find the cause of the issue and at least get the editor working, but somewhere between my PC and the server something goes haywire For now, if you really want to post, switch to the mobile theme whilst I work this out. Once I've got the editor working I'm passing this over to the software devs as it is frankly doing my head in now that it works fine locally and then messes up on the live site every time. It's not just the editor though, a host of javascript issues are present no matter how many times or in what mode I re-upload the files.

Hey folks, I'll be updating the software and applying the new theme again in about 20 minutes time, so hopefully this will fix the various issues people have been encountering once and for all. Failing that we could always switch back to the alt.fan.processwire newsgroup as those things used to work consistently (yes, that is fictional ).

Why would you want built-in FTP though and why would it be a big-ish caveat? Use an FTP program for FTP Brackets does look awesome though.

For encycolpedia, see Wikipedia 0.1 alpha.

I used it once to integrate some of the mail functions so when staff logged into a specific site they could also see the contents of a specific email inbox. This allowed them all to see the emails sent to the news@ address and copy and paste them into pages. EDIT: for anyone else thinking down these lines, it would be easier to stick a FormBuilder form on your website now and handle news submissions from the public that way, but this was a looong time ago. There are tonnes of possible uses, but yes I doubt you would use any of the functions where there is overlap with ProcessWire. Thing is though you only need to download the bits you need so it's not like you're throwing the whole library at a problem (just got a mental image of someone throwing encyclopaedia's at me)

Thanks Adam, this couldn't have come at a better time for something I'm working on. Sometimes I feel like I've got a team of developers working in the same room as me, and other times like this I feel like you're reading my mind. GET OUT OF MY HEAD! *puts on tinfoil hat*

ryan - tick the boxes next to the relevant post numbers (top-right of the posts) then in the box that appears at the bottom right select the Split option and you can create a new topic with those posts I've never understood why now the jQuery folks have such a solid product that they insist on changing things with no backward compatibility. Sure, it's only a few changes each time, but it causes some work checking everything works as expected across however many sites.

I'm late to the party, but I've used SimpleXML before as well for reasonably large files ryan - only 2-5mb in my case though and a looong time ago. P.S. I'm brave and have Windows 8 Phone and Desktop. So far the world hasn't ended

I'm going to be semi-helpful and suggest moving away from BT. That said, you will have a harder time getting away from BT than you would have done signing up with them. My last dealings with them.were six months after cancelling a line and having calls since asking us to pay bills even though the line was cancelled was them.saying they'd cut off our broadband - I exasperatedly said "please do, we've cancelled it three times already". Truly shocking company sadly as they could and should be so much better. But yes, this sounds like some sort of firewall block on the server except in that case I would say you shouldn't be able to see the site at all. Type "what is my IP" in Google and it will display your BT IP address, then pass this on to your web host and see if it's blocked. If it is they can unblock it. Either way, ditch BT if possible

A few of the comments on the scandir() function are probably your best bet: http://php.net/manual/en/function.scandir.php It's allfine using other scripts and copying and pasting from examples, but nothing beats understanding how it's actually accomplished, and in this case a recursive scandir() function is probably all you need.