• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

223 Excellent

1 Follower

About Christophe

  • Rank
    Sr. Member
  • Birthday June 20

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Pyrénées-Orientales, France

Recent Profile Visitors

4,340 profile views
  1. Not especially in order to explain it to clients, but for me they are like (data) objects (or items, or how you prefer to call them). And there can be several different types of objects of course. I guess you could also call them field(/data) objects (collections, containers, or whatever term makes more sense depending on the case). Or field-template-page objects, etc.
  2. @bkno
  3. @Zeka Perhaps it's a normal behaviour: you click on Ok as many times as you want to add as many clones as you want, and click on Cancel to stop cloning (and to close the pop-up). I'm just guessing, I haven't tried. Which version of ProcessWire are you using? Is it a "normal" repeater field?
  4. Also resolved it for the other hoster. Same, but with RewriteCond %{HTTP:X-Forwarded-Proto} !https added. So RewriteCond %{HTTP:X-Forwarded-Proto} !https RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://www.domainname.tld/$1 [R=301,L] And RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^domainname.tld$ RewriteRule ^(.*) https://www.domainname.tld/$1 [QSA,L,R=301] NB: the redirection from https:// to https://www seems to work better when keeping RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 after adding RewriteCond %{HTTP:X-Forwarded-Proto} !https Tested several times, with the cache cleared. Perhaps a coincidence, or not... I was just curious to see what would happen if I removed it.
  5. Isn't the website using Joomla!?
  6. I could e-mail - or tweet - them. Perhaps there's a better chance if it's not the creator of the website who is contacting them (?). Perhaps we should make a "contest" or poll here, choosing which one should be proposed (first)? By creating a new topic and a poll. NB: not sure now they would accept it at Foundation - as it is - as the neophobia background image is "frightening" and the other one is too much "advertising".
  7. CMS sub-link: ProcessWire is missing @Sérgio Jardim [ ] and others, please propose your foundation website there. Some of the other CMSs have a tag but without any website there... or with just one displayed. (By the way, if you click on more than one tag, you always have 0 websites as a result.)
  8. You can change the default option. Admin > Setup > Fields > Edit Field: images Input (tab) Disable multi-language descriptions? By default, descriptions are multi-language when you have Language Support installed. If you want to disable multi-language descriptions, check this box. Disable multi-language descriptions?
  9. First solution for the website at ovh (registar and website hoster). Found this again (and that I had bookmarked it already): If not wrong, using this RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://www.domainname.tld/$1 [R=301,L] Then this RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^domainname.tld$ RewriteRule ^(.*) http://www.domainname.tld/$1 [QSA,L,R=301] I only have a 2 redirect message with PageSpeed Insights - if testing https://domainname.tld If I use this instead RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^domainname.tld$ RewriteRule ^(.*) https://www.domainname.tld/$1 [QSA,L,R=301] I don't have redirect error messages anymore (4 combinations/variations). I'll (re)check again to see if it was real. And I'll test later if I can easily transform it to use the non-www version. But I'm not sure if I really want the non-www version or not. I'll precise R=301 where there is only R. It's very easy to invert from www to non-www. Apparently no redirect error messages either. So it's ok now for this one website. I would just have to choose between www and non-www. (technical reasons)
  10. @szabesz Of course I tried also with this. Too many redirects error message. This doesn't work for me (at least while testing it with one of the websites). For exemple, http://www is not even redirected to http:// I'm not going to spend more time with this now. Later eventually. I'd like a debugger to exist for this. Perhaps using a security/penetration testing framework(?). Thanks everyone.
  11. @rick I'm talking about 2 different websites that have nothing in common. For each website, the 4 variations of the url point to the same (common) content. I normally can't use sites-available/sites-enabled (only on my local computer(s). Ex-Ubuntu and current Linux Mint Mate user). @szabesz I'll use it eventually and see if it works for me. Edit: it doesn't work (at least for the domain I'm currently working on). https://www.domain.tld is redirected to http://domain.tld. @SiNNuT I think I have it bookmarked and perhaps also downloaded it somewhere. Edit 2: now that I want to use the non-www version, I have to find a way to change the code I was using so that it works... So much time wasted for things that should be easier to do. Edit 3: there seems to be a difference, related to shared cookies, between the www and non-www choices. Edit 4: I'll eventually try again later with other domains. It's not worth it now.
  12. @rick Do you mean that, in general, there are better google results if the non-www version is used as the canonical version? The 2 domain names are quite long, so perhaps this time I should choose the non-www version. Also, I may have less problems/redirects. But in that case, I'll have to (find how to) modify the code already used for both websites. I'll eventually set the ProcessWire templates to https, as I don't have many of them. In which non-secure conf file? Edit: (Not) the ProcessWire generated .htaccess file? I'm using shared hosting. Perhaps at least one is a "virtually"-shared installation. All protocols are pointing to the same website content. For one of the websites, the domain name register and the website hoster are different. Have a nice day/evening! Edit 2: if only we didn't need to redirect anything (at least between www and non-www), but just had to mark one as canonical/main (tag, console...).
  13. Hello @AndZyk, PageSpeed Insights 1) For the website (Yulpa hoster) using the code at With (only) http://domainname.tld, I have: Avoid landing page redirects Your page has 2 redirects. Redirects introduce additional delays before the page can be loaded. Avoid landing page redirects for the following chain of redirected URLs. http://domainname.tld/ https://domainname.tld/ https://www.domainname.tld/ 2) For the website (OVH hoster) using the code from ProcessWire's .htaccess file (# 9 and # 13 uncommented) a) For https://www.domainname.tld/, I have: Avoid landing page redirects Your page has 2 redirects. Redirects introduce additional delays before the page can be loaded. Avoid landing page redirects for the following chain of redirected URLs. https://domainname.tld/ http://www.domainname.tld/ https://www.domainname.tld/ b) For http://domainname.tld/, I have: Avoid landing page redirects Your page has 3 redirects. Redirects introduce additional delays before the page can be loaded. Avoid landing page redirects for the following chain of redirected URLs. http://domainname.tld/ https://domainname.tld/ http://www.domainname.tld/ https://www.domainname.tld/ All this doesn't seem good to me...
  14. Is someone already using a version with always one redirect only? I don't mind if it's not generic and I have to specify the domain name. PageSpeed Insights is not "happy"... not only with this last website. Also, it seems, with the ones where I just uncommented Processwire's .htaccess rules. Normally google will only index my preferred url. But in case people type it (or it is written) a certain way. Something that just translates : if it starts with http://domainname.tld make it "redirect" to/start with https://www.domainname.tld or if it starts with http://www.domainname.tld ... to https://www.domainname.tld or if it starts with https://domainname.tld ... to https://www.domainname.tld I don't know how/if using [OR] would work. (And eventually the place(s) where it's best to put/keep it in the .htaccess file, for no conflicts, or for performance reasons.) Thank you in advance!
  15. Solution, tested and given by the web hoster, which works. I've just added it (without RewriteEngine On as it is already present) as one block between # 13. and # 14. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP:X-Forwarded-Proto} !https RewriteCond %{HTTPS} off # First rewrite to HTTPS: # Don't put www. here. If it is already there it will be included, if not # the subsequent rule will catch it. RewriteRule .* https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [L,R=301] # Now, rewrite any request to the wrong domain to use www. # [NC] is a case-insensitive match RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www\. [NC] RewriteRule .* https://www.%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [L,R=301] The web hoster couldn't understand at one point why it was not working. They were Web4all, now they are Yulpa. Something I've found today that could be (one of) the reason(s):