Jump to content

PW 3.0.32 & 2.8.32

ryan

By ryan,
in News & Announcements

 Share

Recommended Posts

szabesz Hero Member

szabesz

Posted
Posted
Quote

What do you all think about this as a potential release plan for 3.x and 2.8?

Thumb's up! I'm not a GitHub guru, but it sounds like a clever idea.

To tell the truth, I'm a 3.x only guy, but following your blogposts, I can see that you really take it seriously, and thank you for this! I've seen awful major version changes of other CMS'es/frameworks already, so I'm sure anything you will finally come up with will be far better than those.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
arjen Hero Member

arjen

Posted
Posted

Thanks Ryan. Again not surprised by your thoughtfulness.

Quote

One benefit of this plan is that I think a GitHub account named ProcessWire represents the project better as our main account, as "ryancramerdesign" is probably unfamiliar and meaningless to most. That ryancramerdesign account might even make one question if they've found the right repo.

Agree 100%. A new step forward. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robin S Hero Member

Robin S

Posted
Posted

I'm grateful for the "what 2.8 is for" section in the post. With a limited understanding of namespaces and currently no need to use them in my projects I've been a bit confused about which version (2.8 or 3.0) I should use for new projects. I really just want to use whatever the majority is using as it makes the sharing of code in the forum easier. Now I have some clarity that 3.0 is the way to go for new projects.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike Rockett Hero Member

Mike Rockett

Posted
Posted

Hi Ryan,

I definitely agree on the GitHub change - in fact, it's something I'd been meaning to bring up a few days ago, but figured I'd wait a little while in case you thought of it first (some excellent foresight, this is).

My recommendation would be to convert the ProcessWire account to a GitHub organisation (already hinted above).

It would be nice if there were two repos in the new organisation: one for 3.x (processwire/processwire) and one for 2.8 (processwire/processwire2x), but I'm not sure if there is a way to define some sort of upgrade process that redirects to the new repo for <2.8 users. Perhaps this could be incorprated into the upgrade module. As I understand it, running git pull on the old repo under ryancramerdesign will automatically redirect to the new repo, so maybe that solves the entire problem. You could then keep the PW repos in the new organisation, and have your third party modules over at your private account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
szabesz Hero Member

szabesz

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, ryan said:

the latest core updates

Normally I upgrade by using the ProcessWireUpgrade module and I've noticed that 3.0.30 is the one that shows up as the latest version. Is that intentional?

I've been having another issue with ProcessWireUpgrade and it is about index.php and .htaccess changes detection. It keeps detecting changes even when there are no changes at all. I've been using a diff tool to check for differences and usually there is none, but the module always reports changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
szabesz Hero Member

szabesz

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, LostKobrakai said:

The module does not use a difftool but only compares by version/indexVersion in the first few lines of htaccess / index.php

It's a lot of code to dig through, so I do not have the time to analyze it but one thing I noticed is that I found values like these:

class ProcessWire:

  • const indexVersion = 300; // required version for index.php file (represented by PROCESSWIRE define)
  • const htaccessVersion = 300;

.htaccess:

  • # START PROCESSWIRE HTACCESS DIRECTIVES
  • # @version 3.0
  • # @indexVersion 300

index.php

  •  * @version 3.0
  •  *
  •  * Index Versions
  •  * ==============
  •  * 300 Moved much of this file to a ProcessWire::buildConfig() method.

None of these can be used to compare against the actual version. What am I missing?

Anyway, the change detection does not work as it was probably intended to work ot it is useless in its current state. I just use a diff tool to see what actual changes there are, if any. If only version numbers are compared to each other, then the message of the module should not suggest that it has actually detected "possible changes".

I can be mistaken, but this is what I have gathered so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LostKobrakai Hero Member

LostKobrakai

Posted
Posted

The index/htaccess version state the version of processwire that did introduce the latest change to the file. They are probably not compared to the actual pw version you update to but just if the version changed between htaccess_old and htaccess_new. The numbers in the files are simply manually adjusted by Ryan.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
szabesz Hero Member

szabesz

Posted
Posted

One more thing to add: I did see an actually change to .htaccess a few weeks ago, but it was just some changes in some comments if I remember correctly, so no actual change in the way things work. However, this was a change, so it should be considered as such. But it does not really matter as long as "probable changes" are always reported for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
szabesz Hero Member

szabesz

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, szabesz said:

it was just some changes in some comments if I remember correctly

I did not remember correctly... This line and its comment changed form

RewriteRule "(^|/)\." - [F]

to

RewriteRule "(^|/)\.(?!well-known)" - [F]

but still, "probable change" is always reported anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tpr Hero Member

tpr

Posted
Posted

Setting maxlength = 0 in InputFieldTextLanguage sets the maxlength to 0 here so you can't add text to it.

Interestingly appears only if the field was empty before, or perhaps only on the first textlanguage field on the page. Setting maxlength to 1000 allows writting to it, setting back to 0 disables input again. 

Anyone could confirm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thlinna Jr. Member

thlinna

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Christophe said:

@szabesz
So you are also a Let's Encrypt user...

I am also a Let's Encrypt user. Is there something I should know of about the default ProcessWire .htaccess file? I do not have this ?!well-known statement anywhere in the .htaccess.

Running PW 3.0.32 on my site. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thlinna Jr. Member

thlinna

Posted
Posted

Wow, thanks @szabesz! May I ask what problem with Let's Encrypt does this update solve? I've tested running PW site with LE SSLs' with both nginx and apache 2.4. Of course, the .htaccess is regarding to apache only. 

LE _seems_ to be quite stable, for I do have a purchased SSL from Comodo, and have not had the need to change to "real" one for so far the LE certificate seemed to be very stable one. At least with latest versions of browsers. The only thing I've come up is problem with older Android browsers, and I am unsure if this issue has anything to do with my previous problem. A part of that problem was related to OWASP mod_security2, but not completely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
marcus Sr. Member

marcus

Posted
Posted
On 27.8.2016 at 7:30 AM, Mike Rockett said:

As I understand it, running git pull on the old repo under ryancramerdesign will automatically redirect to the new repo, so maybe that solves the entire problem.

Exactly. I moved wireshell from my private account to an GitHub organization and everything got redirected.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...