• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ryan last won the day on June 23

ryan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13,063 Excellent

About ryan

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Atlanta, GA
  1. This week’s core version on the dev branch includes a lot of small fixes and improvements. We’ve also got a new multi-language URL field available this week as well. https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-3.0.65-core-updates/
  2. I actually think for this module the client expressed interest in us releasing it available for others to use once it's finished. I will confirm though. I used the process outlined on this page (link) to do a lot of it, though admittedly there was also a lot of stuff to figure out with some trial and error.
  3. This week we take a closer look at the useful new page export/import functions that we’re currently building into the core: https://processwire.com/blog/posts/a-look-at-upcoming-page-export-import-functions/
  4. I just returned back in town about 30 minutes ago, after being out of town with the family most of this week. As a result, I've got no blog post for this week. I'd hoped to at least get the email newsletter out, but unfortunately didn't have the necessary internet access to do so. Thankfully back online now. I'll be sending out a double issue of the newsletter next week. Hope that everyone had a good week and has a great weekend!
  5. This week we've got a great guest post from Alex Capes. Alex recently worked with design agency Human After All to build a website for Canongate, a leading independent book publisher. This post discusses the highlights, challenges and successes in building this impressive ProcessWire-powered site. I was really impressed with this site, and I think you'll like reading about it. https://processwire.com/blog/posts/building-canongate/ Next week I'm going to be out of town for much of the week so likely won't have a blog post next Friday. If anyone is interested or has ideas for another guest post, please drop me an email. Thanks.
  6. Are the photos taken with the phone, or does it happen with any photo uploaded from the phone? One thing about client-side resize is that I think resized versions are more like plain jpegs, rather than ones that include a bunch of exif meta data that may appear in the original. Perhaps the visible difference in the photos is due to something in the meta data (like color profile) rather than the pixels. On the other hand, maybe it's some difference between Android 6 and 7.
  7. @Ivan Gretsky Thanks for all the kind words! @bernhard I tried to duplicate the issue here on my Android phone (Nexus 6, Android 7.0, using Chrome) and do not see the effect you are seeing. In my case, the resize was identical to the one tested on desktop (OS X, Chrome). It looks like in your case, the one tested from your phone went a lot darker. I have a feeling it's got something to do with color, curve, gamma or level adjustments being applied by the phone (?) but curious to know what phone specifically, and what browser?
  8. Client-side image resizing has been on our roadmap for awhile, and this week we've got it ready on the dev branch in version 3.0.63. People expressed interest in this feature in the comments to last week's post, and I promised to give it a closer look sooner rather than later. After getting that closer look, and doing some research, I realized we could get in this week's version. After using it now for a couple of days this week, I think people are really going to like this feature, and it works a lot better than I had originally guessed it could. https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-3.0.63-adds-client-side-image-resizing/
  9. Working with PNG and GIF now too. Looks really interesting! I'm impressed with how far you've taken this already. Is this a fairly common need? (chunked uploads). I'm not sure I've come across a case where I would have used this on a site before, but I imagine there are cases this could be a real life saver. Really cool libraries! Probably too much for our needs in the admin, but seems like a lot of great potential for modules here.
  10. I started experimenting this morning. It's not all that difficult to get going. Proof-of-concept up and running already, so should have this functional on the core dev branch this week hopefully. (note: works for JPGs only)
  11. Most of our image/file features have been developed by the community rather than me, and I'm guessing this will follow a similar path. It doesn't seem to come up very often, but since you've mentioned it here maybe we'll have to bring more focus to it. I'll try to get a closer look this week to get a better idea of when we might be able to get more momentum going here. I do agree it would be a nice thing to have sooner rather than later. Also, since you quoted both 2016 and 2017 roadmap, it's important to note that this is a roadmap. It is a list of goals, it is not a contract of promises. We never expect to be able to accomplish all the goals, but feel it's important to have them nevertheless. Always good to aim for more rather than less. What doesn't get completed in one year still stays on the roadmap for the next year, unless it's determined it shouldn't be for some reason.
  12. Speaking for my modules only, I'm marketing these as turn-key modules, not as API tools. With the exception of the ProfilerPro module and Likes modules, the Pro modules that I develop were never intended as primarily API programming modules. They are modules that, outside of output generation, are meant to be largely turn-key, without little or no coding needed. It is true that you can use them at the coding level to do lots of things, they have an API and hooks available, and we could write an encyclopedia worth of content to cover it all. And it's also true that there are a few people, perhaps 5% of the users, that pursue this kind of stuff with these modules (especially Robin S., Adrian, LostKobrakai). I think that's great, and I'm happy to support that for those that are interested in using them that way, and have been for a long time via the support boards. This is a welcome and valuable audience for these modules, but not the primary or intended audience. The intention with most of the Pro modules is to provide things you can install and start using, and not have to code around. The documentation is consistent with the audience and intention of the modules. For those that want to get into the code side, I welcome it, but prefer to support them via the support board and focus in specifically on their needs. Though in the ProFields modules we do cover a lot of API side stuff too. The code of the modules is also well documented with phpdoc as well, making it handy in an IDE environment. If I develop a module intended primarily for API usage in the future, then of course the approach would be different. But because that doesn't describe my current Pro modules, I prefer to support people individually when they want to pursue unique needs that might require additional code, as everyone's needs are slightly different. That's beautifully put together– joshuag is an amazing designer and front-end framework developer, and there's no way I could ever compete with his skills in those areas. Sorry about that, but that's just reality. I can make great modules, but I'm far more developer than designer and marketer. I gave up trying to be a designer long ago. Also should mention though that what he's marketing clearly has a larger API-side than what's intended for any of my modules. And I agree he's outlined everything really nicely. I feel that I covered everything about the product pretty exhaustively. What do you think is lacking? https://processwire.com/api/modules/lister-pro/ Actions are just one small part of ListerPro, but it comes with seven actions, including an action that's a template for creating your own. Also why the surprise (?), the ListerPro page outlines all of the seven actions here. Have you seen this? https://processwire.com/api/modules/profields/ I don't use this one very often, and may delete it. It started back before we had an on-site store, so isn't really needed anymore, as it's been replaced by our store. They are not outdated. As far as the information goes about the modules, they are fully relevant and up-to-date. Though I should mention I always try to provide more than I market, and feel this is a good thing. I like for people to feel that they got something more and better than what they expected, with everything I do.
  13. This week we’ve got ProcessWire 2.8.62 (corresponding to 3.0.62 master), a look at some current work-in-progress, and some nice momentum in ProcessWire usage and market share. https://processwire.com/blog/posts/new-2.8-version-current-projects-and-pw-usage/
  14. Peter, it sounds like you might have an older version of the ProcessWireUpgrade module. It had a bug in it that PHP versions prior to 7.x appear to have ignored, so it doesn't show up except in PHP 7.x versions. If you grab the current version of the ProcessWireUpgrade module and replace the files in /site/modules/ProcessWireUpgrade/, that should fix it. Alternatively, you could just delete the module files and install the upgrade later. If neither of these fixes it, try deleting the /site/assets/cache/FileCompiler/ directory as well.
  15. While a relatively quiet week due to travel, the 3.0.62 version has been merged from dev to master, plus a few other small updates in this week's blog post: https://processwire.com/blog/posts/pw-3.0.62-master/