Ivan Gretsky

I just re-read the previous post. It is what i did ask for not knowing we already have it) Could you please consider also allowing to put color code in that item headers string, so we can also define a per-type color? That would make different types really stand out)

Super cool! Just amazing) This is what we, the Repeater Matrix lovers are waiting))) Are those type icons already present in the new version, or are you saving them for now?

I do not think they are mutually exclusive. And htmx is adding only 11kb True. Another way to deal with this could be using front-end editing. So RM blocks would get a border on hover with an edit button somewhere. All the configs could go in the popup with the repeater item fields showing on click. This could be probably done with htmx even without changing the Repeater Matrix core. But this is also not a solution for everyone, as it is not in admin. Meanwhile @Robin S recently released a module that changes the RM UI kind of in the ACF Extended direction. It adds colors to the RM types chrome (that is only part of this module's functionality). If we could change the items chrome in some easy way out of the box (like adding color + icons + per type labels) that would already bring us forward a lot. Just a possible 1st step))

I think I remember @ryandid write about implementing something like ProDrafts' live preview in the core everywhere, so we can change a page in one part of the screen and see it dynamically update in the other. I think this might be another way of doing UI for this, maybe even a better one (or complimentary to the one mentioned before), as we can see the changes not in some pseudo-markup, but in a real one. And do not have to create this pseudo-markup and styling in the 1st place. By the way, I can see how htmx can help here too.

I was too, but @Jonathan Lahijani's explanation cleared things up. We only have to look at the thing inside a screen mockup (see my screenshot). We can interact with it create new blocks and toggle the edit/render state of the blocks. This thing can be a better UI for a RM-based content builder, but when dealing with a lot of blocks it can get in the way taking too much space. Anyway, I think there is a rather not-so-hard way to implement it not changing everything in PW admin (not rewriting it as a SPA) - using something like htmx (see example in the end of the linked page). Htmx is getting a lot of attention in Django and Flask communities lately. Maybe we could use it for these kind of things.

Thanks for the great suggestions! Will make my mind around it and try. If anyone has other ideas or experience on the topic, please share. I did not consider REST API for using $user data from the main registration site on the other installations (and do not have expertise in this). Are there other (simpler? more PW-ish?) ways to do it?

Maybe there could be an easy solution? Like adding a list of ips and/or domain names that should be treated like a localhost to the config?

Cool stuff, @Rudy! May I ask a few additional questions? Do you limit the ability to login/register to only one installation? How? You do not re-create users on all installations, do you? Are you using user info from one installation in all the others? I mean something like $user->hasRole() and things like finding users? How? Are you using API call to other instances?

Great additions! Have not tried'em yet, but my next week will be full of fun) Thanx, @ryan! I was amazed to see my name in the blog post, but I need to say that all the credits for those images should go to @David Karichas they were taken from his fundamental video. By the way, everybody caring about the future of PW and its infrastructure please ??? donate to David as a creator, who shapes the things we use (and dream of), so he feels even more motivation to keep doing his thing. He asked for the support. And of course, go get your copy of ProFields if you have not already, as that is one of the coolest ? things you can get for your PW site and supports PW development as a whole. Sorry for the emojis, but it is late friday night here where I am at and I feel exited)))

@Rudy, surely I want a copy) But even more than that I want an explanation how to use it and how exactly will it fit my case. Could you please write a little more about it if you got time?

Good day everyone! Hope you all safe and healthy! I am thinking about a rather ambitious project (for me). It should consist of a number of ProcessWire based sites which will serve the same group of registered users. I need to make the user registration a one time process. And I need to share the user data across the sites. Single sign-in is also in plans. I am thinking about placing the user info and all the user data in one installation and somehow sharing it between all the other. But I am open to any suggestions. Please share your thoughts and experience on the topic. I am only in the very beginning and trying to estimate is it even doable.

I was asking about creating Repeater fields as a type of Mystique.

Hey @ukyo! Every time I write here I want to start with a thank you, as I like the module so much) Now to the question. Is it possible now or could it be implemented to support repeater / repeater matrix fields? P.S. Are there any rumors about when is the next branch going to be merged?

Hey @Pete! You can limit types by template out of the box - look at the template overrides. There is a nice module by @Robin S that can do more than that. Is you need to restrict in part of the page tree, you will need to reach for hooks. You can look at the ones Robin uses in his module.

Great news you're working with Repeater/Repeater Matrix once again, @ryan! This new enhancement is superb and in line with the community requests in the Making Repeater Matrix better suitable for content building umbrella topic, specifically with @Zeka's 1st one in this post. Thank you! This is also a quite requested feature, so eagerly waiting on it! Could you please consider adding the ability to override the default mechanism of adding new items, so we could build a nicer UI for it if needed, as described here. Thanx in advance))

I don't))) I just read "Have a more robust and portable and setup where I can spawn vps's with a click" and it sounds like proxmox. I am happy with my shared hosting for PW sites) Actually I do not see a need for a dedicated VPS for a site in most cases. Why not put all those sites in one VM with LAMP installed and create new ones copying virtual host configs? You have you backup and everything else in shell scripts or ansible plays. And this way you are not locking yourself in any proprietary thing you try to avoid.

Hey @joe_g. You could take a look at proxmox - the open source classics. If you want to go with containers and Kubernetes, there are things like rancher.

I was talking about Ryan. He is the one looking after the core (and everything really). Just wrote that post to let him know I am thankful he does.

Great to see those core things evolving. Someone has to look after them. And we all know who that is))

@elabxPretty nice, actually) There are issues, but I am getting my way around them)

Understood. To make dealing with this particular case easier, do you think we add parameters to ___pageNotAvailableInLanguage() method which defines what page the redirect will lead to and what http code will it be. Or do you suggest to replace the whole method in this case?

Great job @ryan! I am really interested in this: While you're at it, could we make this behavior hookable, so it is possible to choose to redirect not to the default, but rather to the other language available? Right now the languages getDefault() method is not hookable, so we would have to replace the whole ___pageNotAvailableInLanguage(). I guess making getDefault() hookable would solve this (and many similar demands in other places). What do you think? P.S. Making publishing page in default language not mandatory would be even better, but this is a larger request)

Ok, I am getting deeper) I figured out I need to turn off No debug bar in... -> Form Builder Iframe in Tracy's config. That fixed it! And it seems that we do not even need the X-Requested-With: XMLHttpRequest header for that. But I am actually having another issue with my implementation. Which I am not sure sure is Tracy related, but maybe you could help me anyway) I am Initiating a page reload with js (document.location.reload();) after certain data was returned (on successful form submission). Is there a way to pass Tracy debug data in this case to the final page? I already coped temporarily turning the redirect off, but would like to know if I could do it in case that was impossible.

Thanks both of you! That was my thought too. I did it (adding ajax-header) last nigh with no success. Checked it today - I am pretty sure it doesn't help. X-Requested-With: XMLHttpRequest header is being sent, but bd() in the FormBuilder hook defined in ready.php still doesn't show.

Good day, @adrian! Let me first of all once again thank you for Tracy Debugger. It made the development with PW a whole new thing. Even more pleasant and powerful. You get so used to it that if it doesn't work somewhere you feel lost. That's what happened to me. I am using htmx js library. It makes xhr requests to the server, receives html and swapes some part of the page with the part of the received document making it feel dynamic. I am using it to make Form Builder forms embedded with method C submit without page reload. I got hooks on several methods of Form Builder. And I put bd's there. But when htmx runs, Tracy doesn't show those dumps. Why could this be happening and how to fix it? I really need Tracy's magic to debug it)) P.S. Hooks on Page::render for the pages loaded with htmx work, so it is not like nothing is working.