Mike Rockett

@renobird -- Glad you like it! Yeah, please; I'll appreciate that very much.

Ah, right! My brain has been very much turned off... (When I asked the question, I had a scenario in mind - whether or not this impacts it is now lost in the wind. If it hits me again, I'll mention it.)

@netcarver - yeah, will do so. Thanks. Edit: Done

I could certainly write one for my module, but I really think it's something that should be in the core... Wouldn't you think?

You'll need to declare a RewriteBase: RewriteBase /sito/ There are examples from line 118.

(Removed)

Jumplinks for ProcessWire Latest Release: 1.5.63 Composer: rockett/jumplinks ⚠️ NEW MAINTAINER NEEDED: Jumplinks is in need of a new maintainer, as I’m simply unable to commit to continued development. Jumplinks is an enhanced version of the original ProcessRedirects by Antti Peisa. The Process module manages your permanent and temporary redirects (we'll call these "jumplinks" from now on, unless in reference to redirects from another module), useful for when you're migrating over to ProcessWire from another system/platform. Each jumplink supports wildcards, shortening the time needed to create them. Unlike similar modules for other platforms, wildcards in Jumplinks are much easier to work with, as Regular Expressions are not fully exposed. Instead, parameters wrapped in curly braces are used - these are described in the documentation. As of version 1.5.0, Jumplinks requires at least ProcessWire 2.6.1 to run. Documentation View on GitLab Download via the Modules Directory Read the docs Features The most prominent features include: Basic jumplinks (from one fixed route to another) Parameter-based wildcards with "Smart" equivalents Mapping Collections (for converting ID-based routes to their named-equivalents without the need to create multiple jumplinks) Destination Selectors (for finding and redirecting to pages containing legacy location information) Timed Activation (activate and/or deactivate jumplinks at specific times) 404-Monitor (for creating jumplinks based on 404 hits) Additionally, the following features may come in handy: Stale jumplink management Legacy domain support for slow migrations An importer (from CSV or ProcessRedirects) Open Source Jumplinks is an open-source project, and is free to use. In fact, Jumplinks will always be open-source, and will always remain free to use. Forever. If you would like to support the development of Jumplinks, please consider making a small donation via PayPal.

Me being dumb again -- 'updated_at' is not a string. Very clever indeed. Edit: No, that wasn't it. But it works now...

As the title says... I'm using the following config: $options = array( 'items' => $redirects, 'itemLabel' => 'name', 'itemLabel2' => 'updated_at', 'edit' =>'entity/?id={id}', 'add' =>'entity/', 'addLabel' => 'New Redirect', 'sort' => false, ); Using 2.5.12 (haven't updated to 2.5.13 yet).

Ah, my bad... I'm quick to click! Thanks

I have seen this, but it's specific to message. I need it for processing decisions.

That looks pretty decent indeed. Thanks

I think it would be really nice to have $session->flash('key', 'val'), only valid for the next request. What do you think? (I know I need it...)

So I've been wondering... What happens if a module gets an upgrade and it's DB table(s) need a schema update? Any decent way of handling this?

(removed)

Turns out #MyTabs needs to be a form. Then it works. Seems hacky - I don't need a form...

@Pete - I'm using your method with my new module, but it's applying padding when using the default admin theme: If I remove the margin from #MyTabs > .InputfieldContent, the result is: Am I doing it wrong? Reno theme works perfectly. As does Apertus. Modesta doesn't, but I'm not worried about that.

Tom: Regarding Legacy Domains, do you think it may come in handy if we were to add per-redirect exceptions? Perhaps you want to keep a URL on your legacy domain, but if its accessed on the new site, you don't want to redirect to legacy. Yes?

It's evidently the last bits where you're redirecting to http404, which I don't think is the greatest idea. Perhaps you could just output a message if the segment isn't specified?

I find it weird that you're being redirected to /http404/ - it's supposed to pass-through that URL, and display the URl that was entered (/drains-backing-up-total-drain/) in the address bar. So that's your problem there - perhaps another module is interfering, and forcing the http404 redirect? What have you got installed?

Module should be working fine... Are you getting an Apache 404, or a ProcessWire 404? If it's the PW 404, please could you send a screenshot of your redirect's edit page or a dump of the redirect directly from phpMyAdmin?

(Removed)

[solved] So I'm trying to add a date-time field to a form in my module, but I get the following fatal error: No idea what's wrong there... Is there a specific way I'm supposed to be calling it? Lol, nevermind - used InputfieldDateTime instead of InputfieldDatetime. I have learned my lesson.

So I'm hacking away at the new module right now, and I need to ask if anyone needs the following features: 1. PassThroughs - keep the old url and serve content at a new url. I don't think anyone will need this, but I'd like to know if anyone does, and how important it is to them. 2. The ability to set HTTP Status Codes (301, 302, 307) on a per-redirect basis. I guess this is handy for temporary stuff, like for short URLs... 3. The ability to set a start and end date for the redirection I guess that 2 and 3 go with one another. In other words, if I set a start and end date, the redirect should be 302. Am I right? If so, would number two be redundant? Update - I'm not doing feature 1. Features 2 and 3 are being done, but the outcome of feature 2 will be determined what is set for feature 3.

I'm very much in Joss' boat here - for me, PW is a true all-rounder, ready for anything. I stumbled upon PW a few years back when I was looking for a system that allowed me to seamlessly work with multiple content-types. This was my big issue in my search. I used WordPress for about a year. In that short time, I found myself judging it more often that I would judge anything. I say that without the intent of throwing flames. Since my career in web development began, I'd been looking for a great platform on which to do great things. As time went on, I found various different options - of course, like with most things, they all did at least one thing good to suit my needs. Problem was, it was only partial - no system before PW did what I wanted it to do the way I wanted it done, and in a seamless and effortless (no, I'm not lazy) manner. I had stumbled onto PW before - back in the 2.0 days, but I didn't like the interface, at all. I believe it was 2.4 that changed the interface (it's design; UI, specifically) - it was at that point that I fell for it. I'm now at the stage where I can't look back. PW does everything that needs to be done, and then some. And it does it in an elegant way. This is what I was searching for. WordPress didn't do that for me. Joomla didn't do that for me (granted - I didn't use Joomla for very long at all). Nor did Drupal. Granted, those are all beast systems - but they are advertised that way - in a way, that can make them quite scary. Bolt, a reasonably new system, did most of what I wanted, but it's very limited, and, as such, should probably only be used for small sites. PW is more of a beast than the big three above to me. The silent beast. I'm sure you all know what I mean. I'd also like to ask something: I see more and more, around the internet and mostly in forums, that developers seem to choose their CMS based on what CMS the client wants. I find that quite interesting, because I've never had that experience. I have small and medium sized businesses in my portfolio - a decent amount of them quite knowledgeable in the web development field - and none of them asked me to use a specific CMS. They all just say, "use what you wish, as long as it gets the job done." So I ask, is this common elsewhere in the world? And if so, how do you deal with it?