diogo

:D Nice to see so many Zorros after coming back a few hours laters. And best of all, look at who's reading this thread right now

Zorro masks? What Zorro masks??

Just tried it. Everything went smoothly http://rhodium-4zp.lightningpw.com/ Loved the TOS in simple words PS: noticed a small typo: in"We’re using an credit based system for payments"

THAT was Fuckin awesome!

Pete, I wonder for how long you will keep that one this time

You can include _init.php in all templates by adding this to your config.php $config->prependTemplateFile = '_init.php'; https://github.com/ryancramerdesign/ProcessWire/blob/master/site-default/config.php#L45

That's why you are postponing yours? Want a suggestion? Or more eclectic

I know it was not you saying it, but if you also think that by simply calling PW a CMS we are attracting... what would you say about offering them a couple of ready to use thingies with the basics and then telling them that they have to construct everything else by themselves? Maybe it would help PW to attract more people to download it, but wouldn't it lead to more frustration and loss of time?

@argos, great to hear that. I would feel a bit responsible if you would have the opposite reaction and give up on PW and on us... But, if you say you feel that you are getting behind and frustrated for not being able to implement your ideas, I would say that you arrived to PW at the right time. Go through the tutorial calmly, don't hurry. Start with replacing the content in your html by simple PHP like <?=$page->body?> and ignore all the complex stuff that people write in the forums some times, later you will understand them. Don't jump to the cheatsheet without first reading the API Docs. Read why Ryan decided not to use {{these kind of tags}} and use pure PHP instead. Give yourself time to learn something that you feel you needed for some time. By the time you will feel comfortable with PW, you will realize that you also know PHP. Oh the joy --- As I said, I understand the need of discussing the tool and also the way that it sells itself to people. But it's how the core of PW is structured that makes it such a flexible tool. Changing the way it works would start removing that flexibility and make it become heavier and heavier. It's what people will do with PW that will make it grow stronger and directed towards other publics, not as it's core, but as the tool behind each of those applications. Couldn't be closer to the truth! PW is a very friendly CMS to those that will use it as a content management system, your clients, and is a powerful tool for you, the developer, to make sure that they will get the absolute best experience. EDIT: totoff was faster

Just to be sure, can you press "edit" on the right of that "Modules" page in the tree? It should go to the same URL that Martijn pointed, but just to check. My guess is that something went wrong with the install. Maybe you can install it one more time to see if you get he same problem. In the the folder site > assets > logs

The wiki is not being maintained, and all the relevant information is now on the main docs on the PW site.

I will like all @mr-fan posts until it covers the multiple likes that wanted to give him for this one https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7565-making-pw-more-userfriendly/?p=72900

Last reply for today, and only because I sneaked in the phone when I shouldn't anymore if you are a professional site creator, and want to do it well, honestly you have two options: or you partner with a coder or you become a coder. As you said, it will make your life much easier. If you want to become a coder, in my opinion there's no better tool than PW, and no better place than this forum. I hope you won't feel discouraged by this talk, and that you stick around. start with the basics, without hurrying, and I'm sure that in some months you will be surprised with how much you learned.

I'm giving my opinion as much as you are, right? I wasn't a coder when I started playing around with pw, I was a graphic designer that knew a little of html, but liked PW because I understood that it was more flexible than other easier systems. All I'm saying is that, from the moment you understand that you have a powerful tool in your hands, either you are willing to learn it or you don't. Both choices are perfectly fine. I'm not looking down to anyone, and I'm sorry if it came out that way. Again, just giving my personal and absolutely independent opinion.

And what else should be in the core? Forum? E-commerce? Local finances tax systems? Should we vote and have in the core the most popular features? Or should we leave the core light and efficient so that even an average developer can quickly create any of those for their clients? Should PW be aimed at the regular Joe that wants a blog like all the others in one day, or should it be aimed at the regular Joe that is willing to pay a competent PRO to create a customised solution? There are dozens of good CMSs made especially for that public, like http://www.couchcms.com/ or http://www.surrealcms.com/ or even http://grabaperch.com/ . These tools don't try to be more than that. They have a focus, they follow it, and they do it well. Pw is actually a very simple system (in the way you mean it), but yes, it is directed at coders and everyone willing to learn a bit of code. But it's not only usable by coders, they are only intermediaries who make it usable by anyone with a business who wants a website. In that context, the potencial users that know HTML/CSS but are not willing to learn a bit of PHP become a much smaller percentage.

What you described here is the opposite of PW. Call it what you want, but if these are your requirements for a tool to call itself a CMS, than PW is not —and won't be— one. This can happen with site profiles though. We only have to wait that they appear, and they will with time.

Hey John, are you gone? What are your thoughts on the pw api?

Wait, do you want this to be the behaviour, or you don't want it? Is selector a pageArray, there? Doesn't sound like, and that variable should be the array with the result of the first find. You don't need the quotes inside the brackets in ("{$filter}"), since $filter is already a string.

I will explain (I'm not being very clear today, it seems) Well... your solution looks ok. Just wondering what you want to improve on it. This depends a lot of what you want to do exactly. If you want to show all results from a first find in the beginning, and then let the user filter those, you can do it with js to prevent having to communicate with the server all the time. You can do that by storing some data in the html tags and hiding them selectively. Might also be that this solution doesn't suit your project at all, of course. Here's an example of mine that works like that (in Portuguese, sorry) http://ordenaracidade.pt/trabalhos/

Your solution seems fine to me... or I don't understand what is the doubt (?) If your filters are simple you might want to use JS instead. If all you want is to hide things, why send it back to the server? You could easily do it with data attributes on each result.

Sorry, I was on mobile and it came out a bit cryptic I meant two databases of course.

import the two backups to two different tables on your own computer, export them with the same program and check if the results are the same.

try "past year"

Can you post the code with that you tried for the two lists? Did you change also the variables?

I think it will happen less from now on