Jump to content

David Karich

Members
  • Posts

    161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by David Karich

  1. Unfortunately, that's how I understood it and I didn't understand it. Actually, all the real gamechanger proposals were rejected, especially the ones that so many people have been asking for years. At its core, PW is obviously tied to what Ryan needs it for, not the community.
  2. Yes, exactly. I am also aware that there is still some time left, but I don't want to delay the situation until the last minute, because many customers have and send via Office365. 🙂
  3. I think the most talked about feature is an asset manager. The drilling down of file and imagefields so that you can choose assets from a global library that have already been uploaded somewhere, instead of having to upload assets multiple times. Actually, the approach using references is the best I've come across so far. The data remains where it was originally uploaded, but is only referenced in a file/image field on another page.
  4. Hey guys, Microsoft is deactivating SMTP Basic Authentication at the end of the year. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/exchange/clients-and-mobile-in-exchange-online/deprecation-of-basic-authentication-exchange-online Has anyone already found a solution to get Office365 working with OAuth 2.0? @ryan would it be possible to adapt your "WireMailGmail" module? Or maybe someone is knowledgeable enough to design a general OAuth wireMail module? ?
  5. Hi @Leftfield, the detection is done via a simple RegEx in a match group. You can add the string "Screaming Frog SEO Spider" with spaces to the list. But without a pipe at the end. go-http-client|googlebot|bingbot|link|googlebot-image|yandexbot|semrushBot|ahrefsBot|zoominfobot|applebot|seznambot|yak-linkfluence|barkrowler|blexbot|yandeximages|cfnetwork|linkedinbot|feed|dalvik|validator|baiduspider|2345Explorer|survey|surdotlybot|Screaming Frog SEO Spider
  6. @ryan I'm really looking forward to testing it! Awesome. One question in advance: are there ways to exclude Fieldtypes? Example, my module PageHitCounter. The number of hits should of course not be overwritten by another version. I haven't tested it yet, but is it the case that if a Fieldtype doesn't have a version interface implemented, it won't be versioned?
  7. Hey @ryan, I'm so excited about the feature. The two big things I think ProcessWire is missing are versioning and a lack of global asset management. ProDrafts was a good approach so far, but had limitations. Can you perhaps briefly explain how the versioning module works? ProDraft had the approach that everything I save is saved in a draft until I publish. Is this also the approach here, that every time I save a page a new version of the last state before saving is created or do I have to create a new version myself beforehand, in which I work, revise a draft and then "restore" it when I'm done as a form of "fake" publishing?
  8. No, this is not possible. As described in the cons, the hits are only summed up and no historical data is collected. The module has no claim to be a statistics module, only a small helper for a quick overview of accesses and interest-based sorting. Please ask @bernhard, he once wrote an extension as a module, which should extend my module with these functions.
  9. Hey @kongondo, is there actually anything new to see here? ?
  10. Wow. Looks absolutely incredible. ? Really gives you a feel of an asset library. Great work. Looks intuitive too. Can't wait to test it out. ? Two questions: how should uploads happen? Can I just upload assets via DND in a folder or is the "New" button meant for uploads? If so, I would give it a different name, e.g. "Upload Media". Second question: does the search always refer to the entire library or only to the currently selected folder? Can I change the search behaviour in an advanced mode?
  11. Hey @Robin S, thanks for this incredibly useful module. Since PW is now more oriented towards TinyMCE and I am already adapting new projects as well, the question is whether you have plans to port this module for TinyMCE as well?
  12. @kongondo And because it is so much fun to think about the new MM and which requirements are more difficult to implement so far, I have another feature request. ? I have a few multi-language websites that keep running into the problem that different images have to be displayed depending on the language, e.g. because there is text on the images. Currently, I can only solve this in a complicated way using the PW-internal option with image tags. Personally, I find this a design workflow break in the whole PW concept, because the rest works wonderfully with the LangTabs modules. Perhaps also a feature request to @ryan at this point. ? My wish here would be to map the MM-InputfieldImage in the same way as multi-lang text fields. So with a simple language switch, select another item from the library.
  13. Very good approach, but possibly not or not only via a template approach. I am very fond of the PW-internal possibilities of input and field dependencies (https://processwire.com/docs/fields/dependencies/). Here is a productive scenario of how I run it in an editorial workflow on another system I developed from scratch: The article template has the input fields date, category of the article (page reference or select), article images, etc. The editor can upload new images (or select existing ones from the library and add them) directly to the input field of the article images by dragging and dropping. When the new images are uploaded, they are automatically assigned in the library on the basis of the selected category and date. This eliminates a complete step of manual assignment for editors. @kongondo My idea for the MM: to enable a configuration for the input field that assigns new images to defined categories on the basis of other fields of the template and their values when they are uploaded. If this option is not configured, then I would also prefer the default behaviour "uncategorised" as lying in a "root folder" and the editors have to clean up themselves.
  14. @kongondo From my experience, my clients are overwhelmed with the InputfieldSelector and Lister and don't know what to do with them. I would also prefer a very simple approach here: "Search field for text", optional filter options in a simple UI: file type, time period (of the upload).
  15. @kongondo Sorry, I'm a bit tied up at the moment. But it behaves like real folders. When you click on "People", only two folders are displayed, but no pictures from both subfolders. I would also prefer this. Inheriting subitems in the view works well for a few folders, but not for 20, 50, 100 and then recursively over several levels lower.
  16. Hi @kongondo, thank you for your feedback. Since you still ask for wishes for the new version, here are two more. ? Just like the focus point, it would be very helpful to save the image description differently per page base. Example: I want to use a image several times in an article, but I want a different caption in each article. And the biggest wish I have to pass on: Folder, folder, folder. My clients love thinking in folders. It doesn't even have to be a real folder for PW, but just a "fake page tree". The main thing is to have the feeling of having something organised. In this context, a configuration would of course be necessary, where you can, for example, specify where the image is automatically categorised when uploading. An example of how it is solved, for example, in the WP-media Library as an extra plugin. Article: https://devowl.io/2020/create-folders-in-wordpress-media-library/
  17. Two questions where I just read that you are working on a new version. 1. what about focus points, can I define them differently on a per page basis? Or is a set focus the same for all instances of the image? If so, I would like to see this feature that I can define a different focus per page where I use an image. 2. if I buy a license for the current version now, will it be updateable for the new version or are there any breakers here. I'm building a new project with thousands of images to be managed through the MM, so if in half a year, or whenever the new version is ready, a complete reinstall or upload is necessary, I'd rather wait until you have the new version ready.
  18. I can't tell you how the various forks are doing, but my official module is no longer in development and therefore deprecated.
  19. @ryan you wrote a while back about modules you were working on. Unfortunately, nothing has been heard since then. Can you tell us anything new about the Snapshot and Page Language/Translation Export modules?
  20. @bernhard, I think that shouldn't be a problem. I also have other updates on the to-do list. I'll try to push it this year during my Christmas holiday. Unfortunately, I really don't have time at the moment to roll that out sooner.
  21. For the 15th anniversary of my business, I gave myself and my website a present and relaunched it. ? Happy Birthday to me ?www.flipzoom.de

  22. Now that you mention it, the first thing that strikes me is how often I have to build endpoints like this over and over again on every project. ?? I think that would be a really useful feature request, to have a fixed endpoint, which then each module can extend and have access to it.
  23. Yes, I understand. Unfortunately, this case cannot be mapped with the module, because the whole core concept is based on triggering a 404 via a non-existent endpoint and hooking in before it. I wanted to keep it simple and not have to install an additional page as API endpoint and a template for it. ?
  24. But this is not a problem, as long as you can define a segment in some way. I also have it in use, where segments can have any value. The segment definition via RegEx works, for example: regex:^affiliate/[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+$ For all other cases, even if I have not yet encountered one, where you can not define any segments and everything is wildcard (which you should also avoid from SEO point of view or also the potential for DDOS attacks), the module is then unfortunately not the right choice. ?
  25. Yes, this is the problem described. Just tested it. Forget what I said before. This error occurs only when there are missing segment definitions with segments enabled. Edit 1: Just validated it again too, there is no other way. You need to define the URL segments or leave placeholders via regex so that an endpoint can be created and there is a possibility that a 404 will be triggered. And without a segment definition a 404 will never be triggered and so the script can't hook in at that point. Edit 2: Consequently, the request is not going to the module, but simply to your page, which itself is the response in your console in debug mode. But the tracking endpoint can also not be placed uniformly on the root, because in cookie mode with differentiated URL segments the cookie must be stored only on this path. I will think about whether there should be an alternative way without AJAX. But I can't implement this adhoc, because I don't have the time for it and for this project no customer releases budgets anymore, because these use cases for which it was needed, work like this. @adrian Please define the URL segments in your project and test it, it should work with that. ?
×
×
  • Create New...