Jump to content

Mike Rockett

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Mike Rockett

  1. Hi Rinaldi, and welcome to PW! I think your RewriteBase should be set to /projects/pw/, as you need to define the entire folder path from the root of your domain.
  2. Might be nice for those quick sites one gets every now and then (I could be wrong). Will give it a look-see now now. Thanks dazzyweb.
  3. Thanks horst - I'll give that a look-see when I formalise/enhance the module.
  4. Just to add to the client-side/server-side thing: Since my first PW site, I've created a simple module (only for contact forms) that makes use of SwiftMailer (I should probably be using wireMail, but I haven't even looked at that yet) and Laravel's Validation package. The form itself works with JavaScript, but validation occurs on the server-side. All well and good, that's good practice. But I specifically ensure that the form doesn't work when JS is not available. Just my 2cents on the matter.
  5. @adrian - I have added an API method, I'm sure it will come in handy. $this->modules->ProcessJumplinks->add(string $source, string $destination, string $start = '', string $end = '') I think that the WP migrator module should check the permalink format being used (%year%/%monthnum%/%postname%/, for example) and convert it to the Jumplinks-equivalent ({year}/{month}/{name}/, in this case).
  6. Perhaps this could point you in the right direction? What version of PHP/MySQL are you running?
  7. Seems to all be a-okay. v1 sent off to modules directory.
  8. Indeed, though it's a bit late. Done already. Hehe! And it works with 2.6 _________ Last round of bug-hunting (help would be awesome) before I release v1 tomorrow morning.
  9. Yeah, I did see that - just thought maybe someone could throw in a few hints. ;-) Because the module is pretty much done, and ready for release (I've even just made a few screencasts which I'll upload in the morning), I'm now wondering (again) if I should make this compatible with 2.5. I guess I jumped over to the 2.6-requirement because I just love the new ModuleConfig. But, I'm sure there are quite a few people who won't be moving over to 2.6 immediately, and that would like to use Jumplinks. So I think I'll just do it.
  10. First post cleaned up as documentation is [mostly] ready. Module is now stable, from what I can tell, though v1 can only be released when PW 2.6 is released. (I'm assuming this is still a little while away... yes?)
  11. Bumped to 0.9.3-beta. Added import from ProcessRedirects. (Did some bug squashing too.)
  12. Sounds like an Apache/htaccess problem to me... Though, can't be sure. Do you have anything in your PW logs? Apache logs?
  13. In the previous version (0.3), the title tag and the og:title tag would differ as, before, the title tag was not automatically inserted. Now, the title field (and not the seo title field) becomes useless when it comes to the title tag, as the seo title field will be used for it if filled out. With the previous version, it did what I expected it to do: insert og:title for me, so that the Google result title would be different. Of course, I entered in my title tag manually, which worked. So, I think that there should be an option to not include the title tag, if someone wants to insert it manually. I'll open an issue regarding making the option available.
  14. I won't argue with that, given my position (and almost everyone else's), but I must say that we at least need to take a step back for a moment and ask if we're doing it all right. Great stuff, have downloaded and shall give it a read this weekend (hope I have time).
  15. Nico, when I set a title in the SEO tab, the preview doesn't update according to the default title setting... So, the preview won't match up. Also, is it no longer possible to set different titles? The site title format is now applying to both the page title and the SEO title. Is this by design?
  16. Joss, you are quite right. Even at my age (23.10), I continuously think about all the things that are changing our societies; our world. We do need a disconnect. Was watching Life on Mars (US version) a few weeks back. If you don't know it, the beginning of the story goes like this: detective Sam get's hit by a car in 2008, dies, and is thrown into 1973. Along the way (he decides to do what he does best, and be a detective), he mentions something about cell-phones to the other detective, who has a good laugh, enquiring as to why on earth anyone would want to carry a 'portable telephone' with them all day. Had a good giggle at that - and then realised how different everything was back then. (Also, I'm heavily open-minded to all possibility, so there was a bit of shock in there too - people were very set in their ways 40 years ago.) There are so many arguments one could throw in the hat regarding tech and its direction. Whilst I'm a tech-savvy person (and enjoy it), I see all the flaws and problems. My big issue is what it's doing to people. Here in SA, we have an education problem which stems from the apartheid era. These days, African kids are not being taught well. They're being taught not to ask questions about their government (you should read some of the Zuma stories). They're being taught to be ignorant. The real problem is that this also happening on a global scale - albeit in different ways. Tech, at an exponential rate, is making us all ignorant. As I'm not ready to step back from the world I live in, I make use of the 'material world' in ways that comfort me, considering I'm 'awake' to the madness. I design websites for one reason: my client has a dream, and I want to help them get there. But, we do need a disconnect - a big one at that. (Although, some day that our use of technology has altered our genes, in that, as children, we automagically know how to use half the stuff that's out there. I'm sure its arguable.) Back to the world of 1973: I'd love to be able to know what people were really like in the 70s. Without all the fancy tech, what were people like compared to today? (Sure, there were TVs - people have always said that they were being fed subliminal information since the invention of a television; may even have been why it was invented in the first place - but today is over-kill in comparison.) Could go on an on -- I have a continuously-spinning mind. Am interested in the fundamentals, though.
  17. Got confused because you asked for a feature, and with good reason, and then you said it's not needed any more. For some reason, or the other, I assumed that the migrator handles old/new URIs and redirects accordingly... (I haven't used the module, so I don't know it's feature-set.) Or I'm missing something
  18. There would indeed - you'd have to parse that out for each segment, and then send it off to Jumplinks. Does the migrator automatically handle URI changes? (I may just be having a blonde moment here...)
  19. Funny, I did that too. We're all gonna look like we're on drugs. Luckily, however, the headset would explain it. Picture what it'd be like if this stuff was done with a small chip implanted in the brain. No headset.
  20. So, we'd be looking to redirect /2015/01/hello-world to /blog/hello-world, for example? Would a simple call like this suffice: $jumplinks = $modules->get('ProcessJumplinks'); $jumplinks->add('{year}/{month}/{path}','blog/{path}'); -- Side note: would you mind renaming this topic to "Module: Jumplinks" and moving it up to "Modules/Plugins"? (also, I think the tags should go...) I just don't want to open up a new topic when I release the final.
  21. That does sound like a great idea indeed. Ever think we'd have any validation issues? (May not even be a valid question - just popped into my head as I was thinking "raw import".) Also, surely this would only apply to WP sites that are not URL-friendly? Or does Google also happen to index those horrid ?p={id} things anyway?
  22. Hehe, well, it's a step in the right direction. ;-)
  • Create New...