Module: Blog

[alexm]

Hmm it must be something to do with the newer comments module for sure.

I should have stated earlier that i am also running pw 2.5.10 dev branch.

I tried backing up to an earlier installation and reinstalling with the same 2 issues with the tables field_blog_comments and field_blog_comments_votes

[kongondo]

Thanks Alex for catching this.

I can confirm this behaviour only happens in the dev branch since the addition of the updated FieldtypeComments. Ryan managed to break something . Hey, the new fieldtype is still under development. I will bring this to Ryan's attention.

Meanwhile, a workaround that I have tested is to first install the stable branch PW, install Blog, upgrade PW to dev branch. Works fine.

FYI the message logs for dev branch (unsuccessful upgrade of blog_comments)

2015-01-06 18:07:29	lightning_admin	http://curium-kcu.lightningpw.com/processwire/blog/	Updating schema version of 'blog_comments' from  to 4
2015-01-06 18:11:06	lightning_admin	http://curium-kcu.lightningpw.com/processwire/blog/	Updating schema version of 'blog_comments' from  to 4
2015-01-06 18:17:05	lightning_admin	http://curium-kcu.lightningpw.com/processwire/blog/	Updating schema version of 'blog_comments' from  to 4

Compare that to a successful one..

2014-11-30 01:51:37	kongondo	http://localhost/pb/pb/blog/	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:51:37	kongondo	http://localhost/pb/pb/blog/	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:51:37	kongondo	page?	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:51:37	kongondo	page?	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:54:34	kongondo	http://localhost/pb/pb/blog/	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:54:34	kongondo	http://localhost/pb/pb/blog/	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:54:34	kongondo	page?	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2014-11-30 01:54:34	kongondo	page?	Updated schema version of 'blog_comments' to support website field.
2015-01-06 17:46:32	kongondo	http://localhost/pb/pb/blog/	Updating schema version of 'blog_comments' from 1 to 5 (FieldtypeComments)

[alexm]

Awesome! Nice one man! You are a bloody marvellous chap. Some might say a gentleman and a scholar... I most certainly would say so!

I shall follow your process process down to the wire.

[kongondo]

Update: Blog version 2.3.1

Bugfixes

Thanks to @matulkum, fixed this bug (thanks @bwakad) where...unparsed HTML would be output in Blog Posts/Categories/Tags Dashboards in multilingual ProcessWire environments. 

Additions

As per https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7403-module-blog/?p=83971. Thanks to @Gazley, added 'post_small_tag' option to renderPosts(). Enables developer to select HTML tag to wrap around a 'small' Blog Post, i.e. a post excerpt/summary. Value should be left blank if no tag is desired. Especially useful if using the option 'post_small_allowable_tags'. The default tag is '<p>'. Use option as:

//$options = array('post_small_tag' => 'div');//note we enter the tag only without the angle brackets!
//render a limited number of summarised posts
$content .= $blog->renderPosts("limit=5", true, $options); 

Requests

Thanks to @loopyloo, added MarkupBlog frontend demo screenshot to README. See post #304-312 for why...

[creativejay]

Option 2.

Add your custom fields to the template 'blog-post' and use the module 'Page Edit Field Permission' to hide your custom fields as relevant to your Posts types A - D. In your template files, you will need to echo your custom fields separately from renderPosts(). I think I would go for this option since it requires the least work and you only have 1 template to deal with..In your template file you would only echo out your custom fields if they were not empty.

Finally getting back to this project, and I see you tested this with a lot of success. I think I will give this a go. I promise to report back.

I'm also very excited to see the other features you've added since I last sat down to play around with the blog module, because you've taken care of so many things that were going to be a bother in my case. Thanks again!

[alexm]

Hi hi hi,

Quick question which will either be a yes or no and if it's a yes hopefully it will be quite simple for someone to answer...

I'm aware that styling is easiest by just using CSS, however I am using bootstrap so would love to be able to change the markup if that is at all possible. Haven't seemed to have found anything to say there is an easy way of doing this. It's just that based on my design I need to have a div class="container" within div class="post" for each post.

Otherwise I am going to have to do a whole load of mixins and stuff.

This isn't to detract from the module as it is the tits. Just a question to hopefully make my life easier.

Thanks in advance.

[kongondo]

Not sure I get what you mean by

.... I need to have a div class="container" within div class="post" for each post..

Do you mean this

<div class='post container'>My post</div>

Or this?

<div class='post'>
  <div class='container'>My post</div>
</div>

Both can be achieved by using jQuery if you don't mind manipulating the DOM using js.

If the former (add a class using jQuery .addClass())

$("div.post").addClass("container");

If the latter (add an inner wrapper using jQuery .wrapInner())

$("div.post").wrapInner("<div class='container'></div>");

[alexm]

Thanks for the super speedy reply Kongondo! Very grateful as ever.

Ok, so currently there isn't a away to add or adjust the markup elements via the options array?

Hmm... I have this issue in my head with doing it with javascript because of the extra bloat etc. But then I guess it really isn't adding that much and the rest of the site relies on javascript to run so this wouldn't be too much of a bad thing using it for this purpose as other things would break too.

[kongondo]

No, you can't adjust that markup via options.

There's other ways of doing it on the PHP side though, making it more foolproof than doing it client-side.

1. See option #3 in this post (writing your own code to render posts): https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7403-module-blog/?p=83119
2. Maybe using str_replace: See this post by DaveP: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7403-module-blog/?p=78348
3. Copy and modify the method renderPosts() into your own function which you can include in your template files

Using #3 above, you can continue using the rest of  MarkupBlog methods such as renderCategories() together with your own modified renderPosts(). If this doesn't make sense just ask

Edited January 20, 2015 by kongondo

[alexm]

I think #3 sounds best.

So effectively I guess I can just copy it to my global _func.php file and then drop the $this instance and I should be good to add to the markup?

Also one other thing I have been trying to get the featured image of renderPosts() to show but cant seem to figure it.

Have enabled tags in blog_image field and left the featured options as default. Have tried adding the tag featured to the image I want as featured but it is not showing.

Sorry for all of these questions. I'm having a bit of a moment these last few days.

[kongondo]

Pretty much, but with a few additions as well. I have created a Gist of the renderPosts() function here:
 
In the demo blog-post.php and blog-posts.php you could use it as shown below (assumes you've already included the function)

//assumes function renderPosts() already included in page
$content .= renderPosts("limit=5", true, $options);//using our function above//blog-posts

$content = renderPosts($page, '', $options) . $blog->postAuthor() . $blog->renderComments($page->blog_comments) . $blog->renderNextPrevPosts($page);//blog-post

 
For featured image, the default is off (0) . So, you need to add an $options array with values for featured image 1 or 2 for the type(s) of post where you want a featured image (i.e. small or large). Below are the defaults:

//display post's featured image: 0=off,1=top(above post-headline),2=bottom(first item in post-body)')
$options = array('post_small_image' => 0, 'post_large_image' => 0);//these are the defaults -> off (zero)

Btw, note that for large posts you cannot use an embedded image as the featured image. You will need to designate a featured image. For small posts, both embedded and images tagged 'featured' will be picked up as featured images.

Edited January 20, 2015 by kongondo

[SteveB]

I'm thinking of using this. Can anyone suggest a fairly representative and recent blog site based on it which I can show my client?

I realize the best answer is probably to spin up a new site but something real might make more sense to them.

Thanks!

[alexm]

@Kongondo thanks for all of this! I will take a look into it and stop nagging you now!

@SteveB I'll have something up very shortly so will update when it is there. In the meantime, no doubt someone else will point you towards some examples when they see your post. I'll be working on the blog the next day or 2 though.

[creativejay]

@Creativejay,

Did you try my option 2 suggestion above? I tried it and it works brilliantly (tested on lightning.pw so can give you access before the test site expires) .

Sorry I didn't see this at the time to play in the example you built. I'd love to know more about how you set this up, if it's not too much trouble.

[kongondo]

It really is straightforward if you follow the the module 'Page Edit Field Permission' instructions

1. Create all your extra fields for your Categories A - D
2. Add those fields to the template 'blog-post'
3. Create 3 roles . I say three since as per your description Category B and D seem to have the same fields? If not, create 4 roles and give them distinct names
4. Install the module 'Page Edit Field Permission'. Make sure to read its instructions.
5. In its configuration screen use the 'Handy Tool....' to create permissions for all your 'blog-post' fields that you want to limit access to. For instance, if you want all your users with the roles Categories A -D to be able to view the 'title' field, then there is no need to create a permission for it. 
6. The module will create permissions prefixed with 'page-edit-', e.g. if you ticked 'blog_body' as one of the fields in that screen, a permission 'page-edit-blog_body' will be created.
7. Edit each of the roles you created in #3 and check the relevant permissions allowed for those roles. (i.e. give the roles access to edit selected blog fields).
8. Edit and assign your users the different roles your created in #3. You can test with some dummy users, e.g. Jane, Samra, Onuko, Shah to represent your four Categories/Roles. Also give them the role 'blog-author' (needed by Blog).
9. Edit the template 'blog-post'. In the Access tab, you should see the four roles created in #3. If they will all have 'view pages', 'edit pages', 'create-pages' and 'add children' privileges, then rather than granting these to each role, just assign the four privileges to the role 'blog-author' in that same screen. This is a template level access you are granting.
10. Try logging in as each of your four dummy users. Edit a blog post. You will notice some fields are hidden depending on the role that user was assigned. Logging in as a superuser enables you to see all fields.

That's it really...

[creativejay]

Yes that was pretty clear in the documentation, so perhaps I'm the obfuscated one!

[kongondo]

So are you saying you will have four fixed categories? A - D? And each of your posts will belong to only one of those categories? If yes to all, then the easiest way (but maybe confusing) is to create your 4 categories, create your extra fields and add them all to the 'blog-post' template. Then, when rendering posts, pass a PageArray filtered according to your categories to renderPosts() to display. The problem with this approach is that you may end up with lots of fields some of which will be empty depending on the post category and this may confuse your editors. I am not sure if they could be hidden using PW show/if/dependency. I can't think of any other ideas atm. Otherwise, you might have to modify MarkupBlog to suit your needs.

[creativejay]

Ah yes that's what I was afraid of. Thanks for clarifying!

[kongondo]

Actually, maybe you could group the categories' fields using fieldsets! Would that work? So, you would have 3 fieldsets for categories B - D. The normal landing edit page would be for category A. I'll see if I can test this. 

[creativejay]

Thank you kongondo, I'll look into it today!

[kongondo]

Something like this. Only 3 FieldSetTabOpen. For Category A we just rename 'Content' to something else in the template blog-post advanced settings.

Category A

Category B

Category C

Category D

[creativejay]

Thanks a bunch Kongondo! I added the extra fields for field type A to a second tab, because I didn't want to distract from the category select field - I was afraid folks would miss that if I didn't put it right at the top! I think I can keep it to two group types.

Now back to modifying the output with custom templates. Kongondo, thanks as always for the quick support. You're a star!

[Peter Knight]

@Kongondo

If there was acase where we were using completely all our own templates, do you think the Blog Module still has benefits?

I know the dashboard is very useful ... is that the main feature we'd still use?

[kongondo]

@Peter,

In that case ProcessBlog wouldn't work. It has to find 'blog posts' by the template 'blog-post' rather than their parent because depending on the blog style you selected, the parent might not be a blog page. E.g. In blog style 4, the parent is the root page. The only way to differentiate blog posts in that scenario is by their template.

What did you have in mind?

[Peter Knight]

What did you have in mind?

One of my clients has some pretty specific layouts in mind. I feel more comftrable creating the layout directly inside my own templates.

What I had in mind was to replace the various blog php templates with my own code.