kongondo

@icreation I like to keep the names/URLs to my admin pages 'secret'...You probably want to edit your post above?

@Brian Fletcher Normally I would have said welcome to the forums. In this case though, unless convinced otherwise, I consider your post to be spam. It looks to me like a carefully crafted advertising. Your link, which I have removed, has nothing to do with salesforce as far as I can tell.

Explanation of quiet: https://processwire.com/api/ref/pages/save/ http://kongondo.github.io/ProcessWireAPIGen/dev/source-class-Pages.html

Yes, you can copy over sites. The important things are: Correct db credentials in /site/config.php Correct array entries in index.config.php Correct salt value in /site/config.php (not 100% sure but I think good if salt values are different for different sites; not necessary, but good) Yes, logins are separate. If you want one login use 'multi-site option 2'. Yes, same core; update once, enjoy everywhere is the advantage here. Edit: I am assuming that those sites being copied over have previously been installed (i.e. there is a /site/assets/installed.php)

Haven't tried in PW 3.X but going by your 'no install.php' available, why do you need that again? Haven't you already installed site-de?

The modules directory visits github once a day. To force it to refresh, just edit the module in the directory, but don't do anything and just save. That forces the crawler to go back to github and voila, you got it updated Congrats on your new module btw

@ceberlin Hmm...this new version is supposed to be caching responses every few seconds as you are typing in your browser's local filestore to safeguard against losing content, e.g. if you navigate away. . I have no clue though what happened in your case...

@horst @Pete changed that setting and now they link to the first unread post by default. One can also change that setting themselves (although I'm not sure it survives across sessions) - see screen grab..

@ceberlin Yes, you should be able to. In the old forum you would edit the first post and select 'full editor' or something like that. In the new one it should take you directly to a full editor, I think. For people searching where they could post their views about the new forum a title like 'New Forum: Feedback' is more obvious than why!!!! (which btw, is very different from why? ).

@ceberlin shall we then edit the title of the thread to more closely reflect that this is now a 'feedback platform'?

@tpr that setting was changed and should link to the first unread post. Is it still linking to your first post? You also have the option to create an activity stream and set that up to suit your needs.

Please, let's get our facts straight. There are no plans to make ProcessWire bloated! In fact, the opposite is true... Pete did not design the new forum. It is a third-party software. All (I say all...it took him months to get to where we are) Pete did was to try and tweak the styles to closely resemble the main ProcessWire site. He has also tried his best to remove stuff not needed and make stuff we use often to be close at hand (+ of course made sure there was no data loss during the upgrade). Other things come with the territory...Pete did not create 'the visual clutter'. That's the way the new version of the forum software looks like. Are things perfect? No, some things will still need tweaking (like the Q/A style forums). Was the upgrade necessary? Definitely (read the posts linked to above)... Please let's be as specific as possible about 'missing stuff' and any other anomalies.

Maybe we could do it right here...but your thread's title would have to be changed

If it's the colours and sizes, thankfully those can be tweaked...(just as Ryan will be tweaking the store). So, maybe we could create a dedicated topic where we could gather some constructive feedback for @Pete. It would have to be limited to (mainly) the CSS and not the software per se, since due to various reasons touched on above, we can't go back to the older forum. Mind, I am not saying that everyone's wishes would be enacted but at least it would be one central place to gather feedback :-).

The only person I know who has fully done it (like @Pete alluded to) is Ryan ....He built the 'Process' (/wire/modules...i.e. the CMS/Admin) on top of the 'Wire'...the core...Not exactly what you asked for, but this app by @Jonathan might interest you. Am curious, where do you want to go with this? Planning to build something? ...

Maybe download the site files and db dump and debug locally? (i.e. if the same error will occur locally)

Thanks Benjamin, below works a treat in my limited tests public function ___getConfigInputfields(Field $field) { // code to build custom inputs.... // hook into process #$this->addHookAfter('ProcessField::fieldSaved', function($event) {// either works... $this->addHookBefore('ProcessField::fieldSaved', function($event) { $field = $event->arguments(0); $field->test='testing testing';// values will be coming from $this->wire('input'); $field->save(); }); return $inputfields; }

Thanks Soma. I wish there was a way to let PW see my custom markup. Edit: The reason I need my own markup is so that I can tightly control the layout using a table. I have noticed even Inputfields in MarkupAdminTables don't get their values saved. For now, I think for each of my custom inputs I'll create an InputfieldHidden which will get updated with the value of its paired custom input (using jQuery). The InputfieldHidden will get saved and the custom input will display the saved value...

I've noticed custom input areas or InputfieldText rendered in InputfieldMarkup and added to a fields 'details tab' are not getting saved when the field is saved. The values are sent alright. I can't find where and why in ProcessField.module ProcessWire is discarding them...The code below doesn't work... public function ___getConfigInputfields(Field $field) { $f = $this->modules->get("InputfieldText"); $f->attr('id+name', 'test'); $f->attr('value', $field->test); $f->label = $this->_('Test'); // ALTERNATIVE TO ABOVE..hence same 'name' (NOT being used together) $customInput = '<input type="text" name="test" value="'. $field->test .'">'; $markup = $modules->get('InputfieldMarkup'); #$markup = new InputfieldMarkup; $markup->attr('id', 'my_test_markup'); #$markup->attr('value', $f->render());// @note: input rendered but value not saved #$markup->value = $f->render();// @note: input rendered but value not saved $markup->attr('value', $customInput);// @note: input rendered but value not saved //$markup->value = $customInput;// @note: input rendered but value not saved $inputfields->append($markup);// @note: input rendered but value not saved //$inputfields->append($f);// normal method works return $inputfields; } Any ideas or this is it? Thanks.

yeah...ternary operator.. https://davidwalsh.name/php-shorthand-if-else-ternary-operators

Hi Tom, Welcome to the forums . Maybe these two posts are helpful? https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7262-ckeditor-rtl/ https://processwire.com/talk/topic/13468-colors-in-ckeditor/?p=121618 (see the BidiRtl)

Hi Yuters...welcome to the forums.. I got a bit of joy by hooking into InputfieldFile::processInput similar to what was done here. Didn't test much further since my code kept interfering with the files ajax upload (i.e. would prevent uploads)...

Where exactly are these zombie pages in the page tree? Under Admin or under some other non-admin page?

What @adrian said... also see: https://processwire.com/api/coding-style-guide/#4-classes-properties-and-methods http://processwire.com/api/modules/ https://processwire.com/talk/topic/2394-how-to-present-your-module/