bernhard

Members
  • Content count

    1,565
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

bernhard last won the day on January 7

bernhard had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,848 Excellent

3 Followers

About bernhard

  • Rank
    Hero Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://www.baumrock.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Vienna, Austria
  • Interests
    Sports

Recent Profile Visitors

10,582 profile views
  1. I can highly recommend Laragon: https://laragon.org/download/migrate-from-xampp.html
  2. Hi anyway, in my link (and the sublink) you can see two possible solutions: Open the dropdown on 1st click, open the link on the 2nd Show some additional link via javascript on 1st click In both cases you don't need to change the page structure (2 pages in the tree for 1 page would theoretically be possible with hooking/redirecting, but definitely not a good idea). Other options would be to add the parent as sub-item like you showed (parent trigger + parent). You could do this via javascript or via php. The point is that you don't modify the pagetree in the backend but you define what happens on the frontend (display). See https://github.com/processwire/processwire/blob/master/site-default/templates/_func.php#L61-L118 for an example of a custom pagetree render function.
  3. Sorry for my delay The problem is that the touch device I am talking about is my Laptop with a standard sized screen Somehow this device behaves a little different than a regular non-touch device and it does not trigger hover actions even when a mouse is connected. Also here in the forum I have to click twice for the like-button...
  4. Hi anyway, I think I read your post in the other thread but didn't get your point. The problem you are describing here is not processwire specific - it's a general problem related to touch and non touch devices. you can find some possibilities here (and in the linked thread):
  5. hi thuijzer, would you mind adding a screenshot to get an instant first impression of how it looks like?
  6. great idea, thx! needed that several times and maxLength=>... was a pain would it be hard to have the shortcut bdb() for bd($page, [6,999]) ? i think it would totally be fine to have that shortcut with fixed values since we have the other option of defining it manually like you showed above. but i think in 99% of the cases the bdb() would work just well and it is less to write and a lot easier to remember
  7. looks interesting! so @kongondo don't you use vscode git at all or do you use vscode git for simple tasks (like shown in my screenshot) and sourcetreeapp for more complex ones? thx
  8. wow! thank you for all your work! loving the logo - just updated my signature
  9. Making future website upgrades more error prone and time consuming, I agree. I don't have this feeling. One of the things I like most about PW is that I don't really have to care about updates. But I agree that it would be better to have less new features pushed out every week and have a little more conversation upfront to make the result as good as possible. Yes, we should get more organized somehow. yep, my vote for better community managment here I'd be happy to help in this regard as much as I can.
  10. thx @Peter Knight don't know what the benefit of another program should be... I like to have everything in the editor and see everything live while I'm working on the code: only thing missing is a proper way to push changes to a pw site... but that's part of the roadmap thread (of course it is possible, but as mentioned there I think it is a lot more complicated to achieve than I am used to by processwire easiness).
  11. [offtopic, sorry, please comment here in case of questions/interest] Agree it should not be a dependency, but regarding git I can really recommend gitlab.com + vscode - no cli at all, all free and really nice and easy UI:
  12. @noelboss just posted a comment in this thread and the thread is just one of many examples of people looking for solutions of a proper staging/production strategy. we have some modules that try to close this gap, but imho this is an important part of a professional workflow and therefore should be part of the core. don't know how that could be implemented exactly, but at least it would be great to have a thought-out strategy and maybe some kind of standard/best practise guide of how to keep staging/production in sync, be safe while editing, integrate GIT in this process etc. while other features are nice to have for me, this is really one thing that makes me feel totally unprofessional and is a huge pain. i don't think that the options we have so far are as good as they could be. for example if i had to push a fix to a live system, i wished it would be possible to: pull the latest version from live to dev with one click (excluding a predefined list of files / db tables) work on that dev version locally (having all files on the local computer makes searching all files a lot easier) push the fix to git push the fix to production some parts of this workflow can be done with the migrations module, some with the quite new duplicator module, some could be implemented via githooks, but, hey... we are talking about ProcessWire and where PW really shines is making our lives as devs easier and in this special case i feel that this is not true maybe i'm just too inexperienced in this topic and there are proper solutions out there, but following the forum over the last years i didn't see a solution that felt "processwire-awesome". maybe a blog-post covering this topic could be a first step. and maybe i'm totally alone with this opinion... a feature request-voting system could also help a lot here [pub] that was the tracy-boost
  13. totally agree! right now it sometimes seems that the interest is measured by "who shouts loudest"... but we had several examples where users didn't show their interest because the feature has been on the roadmap for a while so nobody said anything about it and waited for a surprise in the next blogpost. just if it was requested this is great example of what robin is talking about. informations about upcoming features are spread over the forum (wishlist) and github... so i want to support robins request and maybe extend it a little bit towards "better community management". we had one occasion where @ryan implemented something that was already available as a module (image tagging). don't get me wrong, of course i prefer solid solutions built into the core over 3rd party modules (i was voting for the predefined-crop-in-the-core-feature for a long time), but i would love to see a little more discussion and community involvment here. i can imagine that this can eat up a lot of time if done wrong - but i think it can also save time if done right. for example the community could do some research (like in the github link above), bring in ideas or point ryan to already existing solutions like it was the case with image tagging. finally i want to thank everybody contributing to this project and helping me out in the forum. i had a great 2017 and it would not have been possible without this awesome product and community! happy and successful 2018 to everybody
  14. @SamC don't know if you just put a quick example here but in your case the checker class does not do anything more then the valitron class so it is nice for testing but actually quite useless do i miss anything? btw: I don't know valitron, I only used https://doc.nette.org/en/2.4/forms#toc-standalone-forms since this is the only library I know that does client-side and server-side validaton in one go. maybe you want to have a look...
  15. one way (maybe the best?) is to extend the class: https://stackoverflow.com/a/8089092/6370411 another way is to store the other class as property of your new class: <?php class Checker { private $validator; public function __construct($validator) { $this->validator = $validator; } public function doSomethingWithValidator($name) { return $this->validator->errors($name); } } require_once('Yourvalidator.php'); $validator = new Yourvalidator(); $checker = new Checker($validator); $checker->doSomethingWithValidator($input->post->name);