NorbertH

I have a PW page that is about 2 - 3 Years old . After an upgrade to Version 2.6 all Pages and modules where gone in Admin backend. As i had no time to look after the page i left it like it was for quite a while. Now that i needed to get the Page online again i searched whith google anf fount that i should upgrade the page to PW 2.7.3 As the Upgrade to 2.6 was done in a hurry , its perfectly possible that i accidentallly upgraded from 2.0 to 2.6. Please have a look at the images to see the desaster in full color ....

On Install i get : Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '[' in /somepath/site/modules/FieldtypeFontIconPicker/InputfieldFontIconPicker.module on line 22 I guess this is because that server uses php 5.4. that does not support the new [] Syntax. The funnie thing about that is that it should support it !

Maybe its a solution to export the whole page to a Profile and install it whith a clean 2.6?

@evan Thanks, that helped me out for the moment! @ryan Actual may version is a 2.5.28 Def that was upgraded in multiple steps to always the latest def version, i tried upgrading to 2.6 but the error was still there. Later i downgraded using a backup as 2.6 had some other issues. (couldn't deninstall the old comments manager ) . Maybe its mentionable that i echoed the $field->schemaVersion and it just gave me a Zero(0). I guess that schould be a 5. I remember something from PHP manual : try { $error = 'Always throw this error'; throw new Exception($error); // Code following an exception is not executed. echo 'Never executed'; } so maybe $schemaVersion = 5; is never executed as all tests fail and so its never saved ? EDIT: Did a few more tests and it does not get executed. I guess thats the reason why the error only states something about upvotes and never about downvotes as even downvotes isn't checked. EDIT2: I had the Funnie Idea of simply setting $schemaVersion manual. $schemaVersion = 5; //I ADDED THIS ! if(((int) $field->schemaVersion) < $schemaVersion) { $this->message("Updating schema version of '{$field->name}' from $field->schemaVersion to $schemaVersion", Notice::log); $field->schemaVersion = $schemaVersion; $field->save(); } This led to a few little Errors where the most interesting might be : TemplateFile: Field comments is not saveable because it is in a specific context

I just upgraded to PW 2.6 The new Comments Admin requires me to remove this Comments Manager , but when i try to uninstall it i get a : Fatal error: Class 'Comment' not found in /var/www/web207/html/site/modules/ProcessLatestComments/ProcessLatestComments.module on line 59 Comments Module is installed.

When using the Comments Module i get Errors at all actions that have to do whith comments, for example editing the field settings. Session: SQLSTATE[42S21]: Column already exists: 1060 Duplicate column name 'upvotes' FieldtypeComments: SQLSTATE[42S21]: Column already exists: 1060 Duplicate column name 'upvotes' ProcessWire 2.5.28 dev Right now there are no comments posted on the page yet!

Great work , no problems so far!

The problem whith changing the elements only occures if you don't use classes or id's as placeholder . If you use em you can far more easily change element. So i t looks like most of the problems we discussed here highly depend on workflow and how you collaborate whith your designers(and maybe their skills). Btw. we are comparing a higly experimental idea to something thats been stable whith something thats been elegant and stable for some years already(like mustache). Compared to some of the widespread and completely bloated TE i think even this experimental TE looks elegant, not sure if you agree, but as you seem to be using mustache i guess you turned your back to those systems too?

Ok, lets go through this step by step . First of alll i took a look at the two Links you posted: ITCSS is a really great concept and i guess it will help me organizing my CSS files a lot better in the Future ! Second about the Article: I got the concept why its a bad idea to add IDs, yes its true if you use em they completely break the "flow" of your actual cascade an i already had a load of issues caused by this whith templates that clients simply bought on Templatemonster or so. But the author also stated that he thinks it's ok to use ID's for internal page navigation as those ID have no relevance inside of the CSS, they usually don't have any CSS definitions. So i don't think its doing any harm if you add some more for templating. Its just additional stuff you put into your template same as if you put some TE stuff like {{{something}}}) into it. Third your example: (after some experiments whith the example DOM Template engine) The change would break nothing but it simply would have the default content in the headline. but this would happen to any other TE too. For example in Smarty you have to add Variables via $smarty->assign('variable', 'Value'); . So if you don't assign that variable somehow the content would not be displayed. In addition to that the designer needs an up to date list of all available variables In DOM you would do this by adding one line: $item = $template->repeat (".list--popular"); foreach ($list as $elemant) { $item->setValue ('a', $element->linkname); $item->setValue ('a@href', $element->url); $item->setValue ('h2', $element->headline); //This line is added to make it display $item->next (); } In this example i didn't even needed additional classes or IDs. Some of my recent test show that you just need to add a few classes or ids from time to time, plus you can filter em whith a single regex if you choose the names right and its absolutely necessary. I also see a few advantages in this: 1. You have the full power of PHP available if it comes to decisionmaking, modifying content or anything else. 2. The Template may contain example content, so you can use it independently if you like. 3. You can use static mockup template and simply make it live whithout any changes at all. So even the Designer can fetch the document whith slightly changed classes and reimport into its editing tool. I am sure that if you want logic free templates you have to pay a price for this, but i am not so sure if that price is so high like if you are using some of the big bloated TE's of our days. At least it's a really interesting concept that really deserves a second look!

Finallly i found someone who actually implemented a TE based on DOM templating: http://camendesign.com/code/dom_templating That brings this discussion to the level of having actual examples available More comes later as i am busy right now.

If they are ok whith javascript , they won't have any problem whith PHP which makes a TE completely obsolete(most of the time), at least whith PW Still the main argument is if you walk around telling pepole that your super TE is seperating logic from markup, you better not just replace on type of logic whith another logic, thats just another language interpreted by another interpreted language, that's plain sillyness. And to be true if you want real logic less markup , the only way i know is doing it via DOM or maybe some other kind of parser that does actually the same.(maybe you know something else?) If you don't care about mixing in some logic, there are many other wonderfull solutions.

First of all , i got nothing to complain about spagetty code. Personally i really like to easily mix PHP and HTML in PW Templates, its easy , its simple and its fast. I just took a look at Patternlab and i personally think its even faster to create some fields and mockup data in PW and then wire it to the Template, than to build a mockup whith Patternlab, Especially when it comes to complex structures where you cant rely on the buildin datasets..(at least not much longer plus you page is already strapped to a CMS) So if we can live whith Spagetty i guess everything is ok. (Besides from Smarty where they build the whole thing to seperate concerns and then find a system to bring PHP back to the template...) The other thing is about DOM templating ... and there i really whish someone implemented a example TE using dom templating but all Links are down or outdated :-( <article> <h2 class="headline js-collapse">Artikelvorlage</h2> <p >Lorem ipsum...</p> </article> In DOM, as far as i know you can address the article tag directly and in addition to that you can even reach all its subelements (article->p). So you basically don't even need any additional classes/IDs at all but maybe for convienience. At least you don't need to spam the whole document whith classes. Often there are already classes/IDs in the template that you can use. And i personally don't think it's such a mess naming a few key elements. Looping over elements shouldn't be too hard as you can fetch the container , get its contents, create a new subtemplate modify and append it.(at least in theory) One thing worth to mention is that i know many designers that even have trouble to understand any kind of logic. Thats why things like Bootstrap are so popular, it keeps alll dynamic stuff encapsulated into CSS classes and is therefore functional whitout using a single line of logic. So Templating whith the DOM is at least for the Designer the most simple thing to do , just add some Classes/IDs to things you want to be changed dynamically. But i am not sure how complex it gets when we come to the developers part ;-) Whish there would be a functional example application, as it would at least be very interesting to see. At least there seems to be something written in JS : https://github.com/medikoo/domjs Btw, i really like Moustache for its simplicity.

Just found an article about templating and it really made me smile: Your templating engine sucks and everything you have ever written is spaghetti code (yes, you) I guess many people here on PW don't give much attention to templating engines as PW runns smooth even whithout one. But the concept of DOM Templating really looked interesting to me. I really would like to hear your opinions!

Sweet, it still looks good whith my scriptblocker active

As i already said , on first try i copied the "1:=Poor, 2:=Excellent" line from the description on first try. So it was my fault not reading the documentation properly, but still there should be a check. @apeisa Thx for the info, i missed that field completely

Getting: Notice: Undefined variable: value in /var/www/web207/html/site/modules/FieldtypeSelect.module on line 65 whenever i store this field to an template from whithin the new "Actions" tab in the field settings. ProcessWire 2.5.20 dev Edit: It happened because i wrote 1:=option1; 2:=option2; .... instead of separating it by Return But myabe it would be nice to have a valid error message if you have invalid options.

Finally found time to do some more testing , and posted all results on Github. Basically it seems like the module created exessive memory usage but it seems really strange to me ... https://github.com/apeisa/UserGroups/issues/39

I go and try to reproduce this on another server first , copying the full page right now good N8 Edit: The Server i wanted to move this has moved itself to a new location so for the moment i am stuck till the admin has send me new accessdata. So i guess its best to whish a happy new Year and continue this discussion next year ;-)

This is going to be weird. Installing all modules on the clean install did not produce any result So i checked the template . Finally after a lot of test i can switch the problem on and off by uncommenting the following line : background: url(<?=$pages->get("/settings/template-spot/")->image->url?>) no-repeat center top; If the module isn't installed it simply gives the image URLThere are quite a few PW installations on this server and such a problem was never encountered. Edit: same problem whith files instead of image Its too late i keep hunting this tomorrow.

I go and try a blank install edit: Blank install is running ....same server ... this is going to be fun to test cause i got quite a lot of modules installed on the other testpage .. looks like a lot of work :-(

Does this module change file permissions in some ways , if yes i possibly can be a configuration problem in suEXEC, i discuss this whith Server admin. edit:... Tested it on another Server runns smooth (2.5.10) .... trying a third one tomorrow. One more edit: Tested third server PW 2.4 no problems at all .

All files from zip transfered exept readme and license , checked it twice now , same error imediately after install . I can try to upgrade PW to latest dev ? Does this module change the .htaccess?

Everything looks ok now

Ok when i install the module the page only generates a 500 Server Error. Here is the error Log: [Tue Dec 30 18:39:56.929767 2014] [core:error] [pid 26496] [client 84.60.116.85:59731] End of script output before headers: index.php [Tue Dec 30 18:40:00.324062 2014] [fcgid:warn] [pid 26475] (104)Connection reset by peer: [client 84.60.116.85:59733] mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server ProcessWire 2.5.10 devAfter Module is deinstalled everything is ok again.

ProcessUserExtended is expected by Process User Extended Integration for User Groups but its not included in the module package (zip from github) ProcessUserExtended is not in in repository , so i am stuck here .