module General site settings module

[theoretic]

@Macrura, think that wire(‘settings’) doesn't work, at least if we deal with PW 3.x and ProcessGeneralSettings. Your approach gives the error:

Error: Function name must be a string 

[netcarver]

Please try...

wire('settings')

Note the difference in quotation marks - the forum editor changes single quotes to curly quotes (at least, they look like it to me) Such quotes are not accepted as string markers in PHP, so if you copied-and-pasted directly from Macrura's reply, you would probably get an error like that.

[theoretic]

@netcarver, thanks! Works now.

[Macrura]

sorry my phone kb doesn't have straight quotes?

[msncom]

Hi,

Help: Echo field label?

echo $settings->as_tel->label; //dont work

or

$module = wire('modules')->get('ProcessGeneralSettings');
echo $field = $module->get('as_tel')->label; //dont work

Thanks

[MilenKo]

Hello all.

I was wondering about the use of this module and would like to check for your opinion, guys, before I start testing it. Presently I setup manually a simple page where all my general site settings fields resign (Settings) with  no template assigned on it.

After that I define a variable $settings (could be a name of your preference ) in _init.php

$settings = $pages->get('/settings/'); // Grab the page url and add it here
or 
$settings = $pages->get(settings_page_id); // Grab the page ID and add it here

After that, I am able to print any field value in the markup by using:

echo $settings->fied_name // text and integer value fields
or
echo $settings->some_image_field->first->size(X,Y)->url // Just an example for images etc.

For sure the limit is the API of PW for any field and the parameters with it.

So my wondering is would the use of the module give more functionality as of the present setup? Bear in mind, that for a few clients I already setup the access to Settings page and they can change anything that is there or provide access to somebody else using PW user permissions options.

The Settings page can hold all sorts of PW fields available + custom ones that you've created/added and text and text area has absolutely no issues being multilanguage.

Respect to the mod development team for the time and efforts for sure, I am just trying to figure out the benefits of use over the present setup.

[Macrura]

20 minutes ago, MilenKo said:

So my wondering is would the use of the module give more functionality as of the present setup? Bear in mind, that for a few clients I already setup the access to Settings page and they can change anything that is there or provide access to somebody else using PW user permissions options.

The Settings page can hold all sorts of PW fields available + custom ones that you've created/added and text and text area has absolutely no issues being multilanguage.

Respect to the mod development team for the time and efforts for sure, I am just trying to figure out the benefits of use over the present setup.

i would stick with your regular fields page for editing settings; I don't think this module is maintained; i have a fork of it with a lot of new features and I use it on some sites, but then i made the Settings Factory module, so I use that instead now. You should be aware that the stock module is only accessible to super admin; one of my mods to the module was to create the permissions to enable other users to access settings; also i had to split it into a process module and the module that holds the settings, else settings not accessible to front end etc..

 

[MilenKo]

I see Macrura. I would watch closely the development of your mod, however, the options and setups seems sort of way too much for the purpose of my simple projects that hold a logo, few text fields etc. At least I got on the right track using a settings page to hold general variables

[Macrura]

26 minutes ago, MilenKo said:

I see Macrura. I would watch closely the development of your mod, however, the options and setups seems sort of way too much for the purpose of my simple projects that hold a logo, few text fields etc. At least I got on the right track using a settings page to hold general variables

yes, if you need to hold those sorts of things, especially images, you should stick with real fields.

The main advantages of using a settings module could be summed up as:

(1) fast an easy to add a settings page (since you can reuse the same json file) and don't need to setup fields
(2) dedicated edit screen with no tabs as on the edit screen (no children, settings etc), no delete
(3) settings stored as JSON in 1 table/field (module config)
(4) human readable editing url, no url param
(5) since it is a process module, easy to link to the settings page directly in the admin menus

more discussions on the Settings Factory topic..
 

[pmarki]

Hi, sorry for not being up to date, I'm working with Magento now.

@msncom I don't think it's possible.

I am happy to pass ownership of this module to someone who will be able to maintain it. In community we trust

[MilenKo]

Thanks again, @Macrura Will give the module a try and will see how can I fit it in one of my next projects. Thanks to you and @pmarki for the idea and the code.

[Macrura]

16 hours ago, pmarki said:

I am happy to pass ownership of this module to someone who will be able to maintain it.

@pmarkii can take it over if you want, and i do have an updated version as described above.

[pmarki]

Thanks @Macrura but @flydev PM'd me first. Nothing personal, I took timestamp as main criteria. I'm glad other people find this module useful.

[adrian]

I haven't used this module, but I have used @Macrura's Settings Factory which is awesome. Is there any reason to consider this module over Settings Factory? Genuine question because I don't know what the differences are

[neosin]

9 minutes ago, adrian said:

I haven't used this module, but I have used @Macrura's Settings Factory which is awesome. Is there any reason to consider this module over Settings Factory? Genuine question because I don't know what the differences are

@adrian  do you have a link for this module? I searched " Settings Factory " in the modules section and it returned zero results.

I am curious to check it out

thank you

[adrian]

Just now, neosin said:

@adrian  do you have a link for this module? I searched " Settings Factory " in the modules section and it returned zero results.

I am curious to check it out

thank you

 

[neosin]

@adrian thank you, figures it was in the forum and not the modules section I needed to search lol

 

[Macrura]

54 minutes ago, adrian said:

I haven't used this module, but I have used @Macrura's Settings Factory which is awesome. Is there any reason to consider this module over Settings Factory? Genuine question because I don't know what the differences are

Objectively, this module provides a clever interface for adding fields to your settings. My fork of it supported more fields, and other improvements. The warning here, as is mentioned earlier in this thread is that you do not want to install this module if you use Lister Pro, there is a serious incompatibility that causes your Lister Pro listers to lose their settings.

Besides that, Settings Factory allows multiple settings pages (unlimited) that you can link to in your admin menus; this module would be a single settings screen only. Further, you must use the fork if you want to have the settings be accessible to non-Superusers.

[adrian]

3 minutes ago, Macrura said:

you do not want to install this module if you use Lister Pro, there is a serious incompatibility that causes your Lister Pro listers to lose their settings.

Just to clarify - is it just this module, or also Settings Factory that has this issue?

If it's just this module then I can't see a reason to promote/maintain this module anymore. Am I missing something?

[Macrura]

30 minutes ago, adrian said:

Just to clarify - is it just this module, or also Settings Factory that has this issue?

My module (Settings Factory) has no relation to this module (General Settings), it doesn't share or inherit any code. Settings Factory does not set a global var for the settings (that is left to the user and how they interact with the SF api), therefore it does not suffer from the same issue which is that this module by default/upon installation sets a global $wire var for $settings, which is already being used by LP.

33 minutes ago, adrian said:

If it's just this module then I can't see a reason to promote/maintain this module anymore. Am I missing something?

I don't personally endorse or promote, or recommend this module – i advise that it NOT be used until the $settings problem is fixed; as i stated in earlier posts, i used it on a couple of sites, forked it and fixed all the issues, but for the last 10 months i only use Settings Factory and i don't use this module at all. It is fine with me if this module is deprecated.

[adrian]

5 minutes ago, Macrura said:

sets a global $wire var for $settings, which is already being used by LP

Thanks for the explanation on this (apparently I didn't read above). 

I must admit that I think LP shouldn't use $settings - it should be more specific, like $listerProSettings or similar.

I actually defined a global $wire var $settings for use with Settings Factory on one of my current projects - time to change that I guess

[Macrura]

so one of the first things i did was change the global to g_settings

https://github.com/outflux3/ProcessGeneralSettings/blob/master/GeneralSettings.module#L31

besides that i added support for placeholders, collapsed states, markup, import/export of settings..

15 minutes ago, adrian said:

I must admit that I think LP shouldn't use $settings - it should be more specific, like $listerProSettings or similar.

+1, i'm super paranoid about global vars now, since i lost all of the listers on one site... not sure if this problem still exists, i may have posted an issue report on the LP thread and Ryan may have changed it, haven't checked though...\

17 minutes ago, adrian said:

I actually defined a global $wire var $settings for use with Settings Factory on one of my current projects - time to change that I guess

did you encounter any problems with LP? i usually use more verbose globals for that, but on the other hand i have a new module that uses a $meta global, and another one with $theme; sometimes it's nice for the globals to be concise

[adrian]

1 hour ago, Macrura said:

did you encounter any problems with LP?

I don't have any listers set up on this site, although I probably will before it is released, so glad I learned about this now

[flydev]

hey @Macrura could you send me your PR about this module ?

[Macrura]

@flydev done