Soma

I deleted mine... I agree with all.

Ah.. ok then I understand and I will delete comment. Thanks! Or not?

::alert:: There's acutally a visual indicator that a module is configurable (gear), I've spent a day looking through all possible settings there. Not sure if you're talking about PW2 or PW2.1.

Some great RT on twitter! Snowball is running soon to become an avalanche... EDIT: It's crazy, search for processwire on twitter and wait ...

This is really great to see coming soon. Awesome! Interesting read and well done. Will try out as soon as I can. Thanks for doing it again!

NP. I feel stupid all the time, that's why I continue trying not to be stupid.

Thanks for your input apeisa and these are valid things to consider when implementing such a thing. I don't consider this being much configurable, but a moduel sounds great if that would be possible Ryan! Any way I can help, just message me. Mainly The CMS we use has like a time out I think by RPC ping, so not possible to have it locked for any longer than the session time out I guess (not sure really, I never bothered looking at the code). So after not working on for maybe 30min, it will lose connection and page will be unlocked.

You can change it in the setting of the Page List Process Module.

Thanks Ryan, I somehow missed that by not looking close enough That's great to know and now works as expected.

It does lock it in the CMS we use and no wa to unlock it till the other closes browser or page. This has never ever caused problem but prevented them. For our clients and projects it's a needed feature 100% of the time, because there large group of editors having access to same pages, often it would be overkill or even not possible to manage access for each page seperate. I agree that it doesn't happen often but when... We or I would even sponsor it if needed.

I agree. If you see the page beeing edited by name/email it would be possible to ask the person to close it. In general there's rare cases where one would left it open. But having it still editable and just show a message isn't enough I guess. It would be like if you go on a water closet and there would be no lock, just a message at the door. Just have it fool-proof, so no worst case scenarios are possible at all. Versioning does help to get it fixed, I agree but still it should not rely on such things just cause it's possible. For me this would be all good and no problem, but you know how clients are that consider them big and important (cause they're trade market).

What would be needed / how expensive would it be to make it really lock? The other CMS we're working with does show a message and no edit screen. I think it's done via a flag, that get's set when editing and when leaving/closing browser. If only a message is shown the user doesn't really pay attention? If only having a message, it should be a really clear message or an js alert.

Is this possible yet? If I'm editing a page, it shouldn't be editable at the same time by another user, instead show a message. This is a really must have feature not onyl for the project I'm working for a big client. Clients always ask for such things straight away.

How can I give a user access to a custom process admin page I created in /admin/ ? Without giving them superuser?

I tried your code with and without includes, but I still can't reproduce this. Sorry, but don't know what could produce this other than something in your install or settings on page level. It doesn't make sense, that it would work differently without than with includes. Maybe someone else got an idea.

I'm not sure anybody can help without seeing the whole code. I have various sites now with multiple includes with and without navigation code and I never experienced something like this.

Sorry I can't spot any changed in the order when browsing thru your site... ? But maybe I'm still looking at the wrong. Normally you don't have to set sort selector if not custom order is set in children. Edit: Ah Now I've experienced what you telling on subnav left side. Edit: There's must be something else involved, cause I can't reproduce this using your code 1:1 on PW example Site.

Not getting what exactly happens, are they random? Do you happen to have set a sorting in children tabs sort setting?

Actually that what I thought and experienced with behaviours of co-workers. I actually modified my Teflon admin theme some times ago to make it not a tab visually. Ohh, great new theme we have here. Nice work nikola! Thanks for sharing.

Thanks a lot Ryan for the useful tips. Trying to extend the config after init, I missed the one it could easily be done before load (shouldn't try these things late at night ). I'll reconsider my approaches.

How comes I don't see any new commit?

Ok I went through this trying ways to implement something to extend core tinyMCE via module. At the end I think it would make the most sense, to make it extendable, customized from outside the core using a module, so that one can add custom editor css and plugins to his needs without touching the core. I got some issues getting this to work completely, wether with extending InputfieldTinyMCE nor with simple hook. There's problems (with js hook) to not have ways to configure per tinyMCE field in PW backend and also got problems to re-init the tinyMCE after extending the config. And on the other hand (by extending InputfieldTinyMCE) having the possibility to add more config fields to backend, but can't get it to output the additional js config straight, as it seems to get mixed up with the parent Inputfield config and only bad hacks would solve it. I'm not even sure if this would be possible or make sense to extend Inputfields in this case. No it doesn't, there wouldn't be ways extend, since it creates a new "Inputfield" type. So by extending the InputfieldTinyMCE, I would also problems when wanting to extend it further with custom plugins. So I'm not happy with it either way. So my conclusion kinda is: Most "sense" would make to have a tinyMCE located in the site modules folder? Not sure. Or should it really be all done in the core?

Yeah ,I know there's a little twist, but it's hard to visualize yours 100% . It is sure spot on and lit a spark in my brain... sorry if it did offend anyone. Well, to put it in Ryans metaphor terms, it should be anyway be called Skyscraper in the body of a Chalet.

Awesome! Can't wait to see it

I set up a field with .mp3 files to upload. I've set it to "required" in field input settings. But if I create a new page and save it without uploading a file, there's no error message shown. Bug, or am I doing something wrong?