Jump to content
ryan

ProcessWire Dev Branch

Recommended Posts

Hey Ryan,

I have just started looking at the new cropping functionality - it's awesome, but I have a few thoughts :)

  1. I wonder if rather than the onhover edit button, it would be better to have an obvious edit/crop button - at the moment, I think editors will need instructions on how to find it.
  2. I'd also like to see the crop, resize, min, and max button permanent, rather than onhover for the same reason - they are going to open the modal and stare at it, not knowing what to do :)
  3. When the image is cropped very small, the resize, crop, max, min onhover buttons get messed up as there is no room for them to display - my comment above would solve this.
  4. Speaking of those onhover buttons - do these work ok on touch screens? Again #2 would solve this if they don't work well.
  5. There seems to be a random bug with the modal edit window sometimes being much taller than the viewport, so after I click "Save Crop", I have to scroll down a LONG way to get to the "Save as Copy", "Save and Replace" and "Cancel" buttons. This is on the default admin theme and it's not all the time.
  6. I am honestly a little confused by the "Save Crop" button - I have to save it, then choose one of the other three options. It is a different behavior to the resize options where I am asked to use existing or original.
  7. When the images field is set to Max = 1, Save as Copy is a little confusing as initially both appear once the modal is closed, but after page save, the original is gone.
  8. I would like to see a way to disable the options and force replacement of the original - I think this is likely the most common scenario. Especially if the image is not being embedded into an RTE, I think the current behavior makes it difficult to use the API to target the one cropped version of each image if there is no Max set for the field - you could end up with multiple copies of each image and no way to figure out which one the editor actually wants to use on the page.

Thanks again for all these new tools!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not apply to become a pw team coder ?

Are you talking about me? If so: It would certainly be a intersting thing, but I've a degree in design not computer engineering. While I'm indeed enjoying coding I'm more the one to imagine things and rant on bad ui or ux decisions and less the one to build complex backend systems. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Ryan,

I see that you just implemented a fix for the Max 1 and the Save as Copy, and also the modal size - thanks!

One more thought for you - do you think that the cropped image should respect the "Min Image Dimensions" settings. I think it is strange to allow someone to resize or crop an image to be smaller than this setting's value.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps "Min Crop Size" could be specified separately? I can see a scenario where I want the Min Image Size larger than a crop size.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ryan!

Sorry for pestering, but now that 2.5.20 is out, I wanted to reiterate my concern around the min size issue - this really is a deal breaker at the moment. For example, if you plan to display a headshot of someone at 150px x 150px and you set the Min Image Dimensions accordingly, but then they crop or resize it using the new functionality, you will end up with a very pixilated image, or one that is too small (if upscaling is disabled) if your template call is $image->size(150,150)->url and they have made it significantly smaller.

I also agree that renobird's idea would be a useful additional option, but based on your comments about the core functionality vs CroppableImage, I think you might think that is something beyond the scope of the core?

The other critical thing in my mind is the ability to disable "Save as Copy" on a field by field basis - in addition to my thoughts above, this will also be a big problem for image fields that are used for populating galleries, carousels, etc - you can't rely on editors to not use this option and it will currently result more than one version of the same image being output.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! Really sorry if this is not right place for this but:

After 2.5.18 update I started getting error:

Exception: SQLSTATE[23000]: Integrity constraint violation: 1062 Duplicate entry '41-0' for key 'PRIMARY' (in /www/wire/core/FieldtypeMulti.php line 261)

Any advice how to fix it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This error means, that there is somewhere some field, which has two entries with the same id, but the id should be unique. In your case this id is "41-0". FieldtypeMulti means it has to be a multi value field. In my cases it's mostly the fault of some custom module, but could be anything else, too.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will there be a PHP version requirements bump to 5.4 in 2.6? I'd love to use short array notations in upcoming modules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will there be a PHP version requirements bump to 5.4 in 2.6? I'd love to use short array notations in upcoming modules.

You can always use this " 'requires' => 'PHP>=5.4.0' " (I don't know if it works without the minor version number) in the module's info. This way the core can still cater to a broader audience.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LostKobrakai, I know but as long as PW supports 5.3.8 I'd like my modules to be compatible. If 5.4 is an official requirement, I can feel save making this a minimum for my modules as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I don't know the right words to describe it, but PHP 5.3 is somehow bundled with Ubuntu LongTermSystems support for example and it gets hardened and patched via their update channels, so it still is secure. Those Ubuntu systems are very common on hosting machines and it is a good idea for PW to orientate on their lifecycle.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me old fashioned, but for minor sacrifices as writing a few more Characters I would not give up compatibility.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not a PHP 5.4 requirement till PW 3.0. Still too many PHP 5.3 systems out there. Though great to see lots of momentum with PHP versions (5.6 is great). 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I don't know the right words to describe it, but PHP 5.3 is somehow bundled with Ubuntu LongTermSystems support for example and it gets hardened and patched via their update channels, so it still is secure. Those Ubuntu systems are very common on hosting machines and it is a good idea for PW to orientate on their lifecycle.

Actually Ubuntu 14.04.2 (Trusty Tahr) was released the 20th of February this year, and ships with PHP 5.5.

In general i think (el cheapo) shared hosting which are slow to update have held back PHP for way too long. It's funny because the ubiquitous (cheap) PHP hosting has been a major factor in its success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Ubuntu 14.04.2 (Trusty Tahr) was released the 20th of February this year, and ships with PHP 5.5.

But 10.04 server is still live (till april 2015) and 12.04 till 2017!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But 10.04 server is still live (till april 2015) and 12.04 till 2017!

I know, but i was just meaning to say that there is movement.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was just about to start developing another site for a client, and I got this error when I tried to install on my local server:

Error: Call to a member function execute() on a non-object (line 240 of C:\usr\local\gca\public_html\index.php) 
This error message was shown because /install.php still exists. Error has been logged.

Any ideas what on earth is happening?

(2.5.22 grabbed about 20 minutes ago)

Edit: I'm guessing this has something to do with the database setup - could be a wrong password... That said, surely it should say if something is wrong? Nope, that's not it... Going to try with an older version quickly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Ubuntu 14.04.2 (Trusty Tahr) was released the 20th of February this year, and ships with PHP 5.5.

But 10.04 server is still live (till april 2015) and 12.04 till 2017!

When you're in charge of a large production setup, updates require planning, work, and may cause both issues and downtime, which is a huge no-no for the people (and/or services) relying on you. Everyone expects to get the latest and greatest stuff, but they're rarely willing to accept that it comes at a price.

The whole point of LTS versions is that you don't have to be constantly updating your machines. It gives you peace of mind and your services much-needed stability.. and, of course, it helps keep your costs at a sustainable level :)

You could always skip the version of any application provided by the OS package manager, but not everyone likes to do that, as it a) makes things more complicated, b) requires extra work and c) means you'll be ditching the benefits of your LTS OS for that particular application. I for one don't particularly enjoy working with old versions, but in some cases I've learned to acknowledge that it's a necessity.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a reason for the inline styling that gets inserted for image captions (figure etc)? And how can I get rid of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated dev branch today (2.5.26) and noticed that when editing pages, only the Title label is visible. All the other input field labels are missing (the html elements).

Edit: Kongondo's blog module posts do not suffer from this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just ran into an issue with ProcessPageLister that has been addressed in this commit, but still persists for me. Non-Superusers can’t find unpublished pages in the Lister (nor via the search box in the menu), even if they themselves unpublished them in the first place. The user can view and edit the page because his role has all permissions on the root-page template, but Lister doesn’t seem to account for inherited access. TBH I don’t understand why Lister checks access at all, considering there’s nothing stopping anyone from seeing unpublished pages in the page tree anyway, whether they can edit them or not? Or am I doing something wrong?

@Beluga: I can’t reproduce this here. Are you using any modules that manipulate field markup?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Beluga: I can’t reproduce this here. Are you using any modules that manipulate field markup?

Now I got it: I had multiple languages and most fields had the label only in Finnish while English is default! It's weird, as the label desc says: "If left blank, the name will be used instead." Should say "If left blank, will be blank"..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...