adrian

Hey @flydev - did you manage to look into the issue I had with Google Drive not adding more backups after the defined max limit was reached? Thank you!

Hey @kixe - curious if there is a reason you chose to fix this rather than switch to jumplinks? http://modules.processwire.com/modules/process-jumplinks/ Is there something you prefer about this module, or just that you didn't know about the new one?

Just came across this need for the SEO module as well. I have posted this request: https://github.com/processwire/processwire-requests/issues/170 Until there is some progress on that, here is my hacky solution. I am sure it could be improved, but it works for now. $this->addHookBefore('ProcessModule::executeEdit', function($event) { if(!$this->wire('user')->isSuperuser() && $this->wire('input')->get->name !== 'MarkupSEO') { throw new WirePermissionException('You do not have permission to configure this module.'); } }); $this->addHookAfter('ProcessModule::executeNavJSON', function($event) { if(!$this->wire('user')->isSuperuser()) { if($this->wire('input')->get->site === '1') { // note \/admin\/module\/ - if your site admin is at /processwire/, then use: \/processwire\/module\/ $event->return = '{"url":"\/admin\/module\/","label":"Modules","icon":"plug","list":[{"url":"edit?name=MarkupSEO","label":"MarkupSEO","icon":"gear"}]}'; } else { $event->return = null; } } }); That results in this - Modules > Site contains just the SEO link and all the others are empty. Thanks @Robin S for the headstart on this!

Thanks @neosin - it should be fixed in the latest version. Let me know if you find any issues.

Hey @teppo - no idea why, but logins are now showing fine in Chrome. It's weird because yesterday it wasn't just my login attempts that were showing JS disabled and no flash info. I'll keep an eye on it. Sorry to bother you!

Yeah it really is an incredible improvement when you don't need all the stuff associated with a full PW page object.

Hey @bernhard - new version is much better - thanks. I tested with 5000 pages and it is an order of magnitude faster than a regular find()

Hey @teppo - I just noticed that with Chrome, it is reporting that JS is disabled: It's fine with Firefox though.

If you go to a field's settings in the admin and then open the Request Info panel in TracyDebugger you'll see this. It's most of the settings available, but some like "required" doesn't show unless you have it checked for the field in question. Alternatively, also while visiting a field's settings, you can do this in the Console Panel:

Best way to search the modules directory is via the PW Info panel in TracyDebugger:

Just playing around with it now - so far looks fantastic in implementation. The only catch is that I am actually seeing slower response times. Take these two examples: VS Note that I am using the Console panels ability to only run the selected code. The ms values don't look good though for some reason - any ideas why?

That module is excellent and works great in PW 3 - if you look at the support thread, @netcarver has been active very recently.

Not sure, but this one does: http://modules.processwire.com/modules/process-email-to-page/ - not sure if it suits your needs or not, but might be worth a try.

Thanks for that - I have commented on your request and also provided a very simple hack this get it working right now by including the tracy core file in the index.php at the root of your site. It seems to work brilliantly - great for debugging PW core files even. Would be great if others could add their +1 to this please!

array( 'name' => 'markup', 'label' => 'Markup', 'description' => '', 'notes' => '', 'type' => 'markup', 'value' => '<strong>Test Markup</strong>' ),

Maybe post a link here so others coming across this can go give it a thumbs up!

Most of the time you can debug modules just fine - it all depends on the load order of things. I have asked Ryan via PM if he'd consider a special hook so that Tracy can be loaded earlier so that it's always available for all modules. Perhaps we need a Github feature request for this? Maybe it should come from someone other than me?

A couple of tweaks today. 1) The "Template Info" section in Request Info panel now properly shows the data for the template being edited when you are editing the settings for a template in the admin. 2) The User Switcher now has an option to limit the list of available users by restricted roles. I had a site where I was using the Users system to store details for frontend members so the list was ridiculously long. Now I can exclude that member role to keep the list concise and easy to use.

This is about as far away from what we had as you can get, but this would be brilliant. He has a great series of videos!

Hopefully we are still considered too young to be grey nomads, but we actually did that in May/June of last year, although we were roughing it in the back of a 4wd - no RV for us Great adventure through some amazing country!

Wow - that's a depressing start to the day! The nasty side of Aussie culture - fortunately we're not all like that.

You are a freaking star! This is brilliant! Love the implementation as well. This is why open source rocks - I owe you several beers (or other beverage of choice) for this one! Seriously made my day - client meeting in the morning and this is going to make things so much better.

Hey @Robin S - no worries - I hear things are a bit backwards in your part of the world BTW, I am a displaced Aussie - hope we can still be friends Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. The issue is that regex is greedy. You can see the problem here: https://regex101.com/r/ynCWrf/1 Here is a non-greedy that works fine: https://regex101.com/r/1Qta6X/1 Thanks again for a great module.

Ok, maybe I was too subtle - by "thoughts", I meant "timeframe for implementing" Honestly not being pushy, just wondering if you are interested in doing shortly, or whether I do need to set up something else. This project has lots of fields with lots of checkboxes and having them all checked will be quite a common need, so it's pretty important for the editor's experience / efficiency.

Hey @tpr - just wondering if you'd had any more thoughts on my idea for a check/unceck all option for multi-checkbox fields? I am going to need some sort of solution for one of my current projects. I can hack something together if need be, but I know you'll do a better job If you don't have time, or desire for this, just let me know - thanks!