question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addons a

All notes and input on 2.0 Development are herein. <ul><li>Feature requests</li>
<li>Bug Reports</li>
<li>Beta Testing Feedback</li>
<li>Open Dev Discussion</li></ul>

Moderator: Coranto Moderator Team

question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addons a

Postby InSAnE NiNjA » Tue Jun 28, 2005 1:53 am

now i know you (parahead) have a couple addons that make up for innefficiencies in the program.. i wonder what your planning on implimenting as default..?

none of these can reasonably be concidered as overdoing it or bulk

IsNewValue - enhances an already existing function
Style Debugger - enhances the basic-user experience, tho i havent used it

possibly some of the coding from customfields, such as multi-select dropdown boxes (assuming the addon's next version auto-compensates for which version of coranto its installed under)
Last edited by InSAnE NiNjA on Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
..nuttier then a squirrel turd..
User avatar
InSAnE NiNjA
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:35 am

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby InSAnE NiNjA » Tue Jun 28, 2005 1:54 am

i have no idea how i doubleposted here...
..nuttier then a squirrel turd..
User avatar
InSAnE NiNjA
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:35 am

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby Parahead » Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:38 am

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:IsNewValue - enhances an already existing function
It is in fact allready included in the next development version. Actually all the other isNewXXX subs are just 'slaves' to this sub now which have reduced the codebase for them quite much...

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:Style Debugger - enhances the basic-user experience, tho i havent used it
There is a basic style debugger with code provided by LoneOwl included in the next development version. The errorpage is also enhanced so that when you hit the 'back'-button if something goes wrong your latest changes aren't wiped out (which occured with some browsers)...

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:possibly some of the coding from customfields, such as multi-select dropdown boxes (assuming the addon's next version auto-compensates for which version of coranto its installed under)
This is the problem with implementing addons into the core instead, especially parts of an addon. An addon (preferably) needs to work with both the latest version of Coranto and old versions. Compensating for code which may or may not be in the core can be a little tricky and a source of errors. Having that said, I do agree that some stuff in CustomFields could go into the core...

I hope that gave you some more info on the subject and was what you wanted to hear? :-)
Yes, I am still around...
www.parahead.com/coranto/
User avatar
Parahead
 
Posts: 4837
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:54 pm
Location: Stockholm - Sweden

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby InSAnE NiNjA » Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:26 am

Parahead wrote:
InSAnE NiNjA wrote:possibly some of the coding from customfields, such as multi-select dropdown boxes (assuming the addon's next version auto-compensates for which version of coranto its installed under)
This is the problem with implementing addons into the core instead, especially parts of an addon. An addon (preferably) needs to work with both the latest version of Coranto and old versions. Compensating for code which may or may not be in the core can be a little tricky and a source of errors. Having that said, I do agree that some stuff in CustomFields could go into the core...


being the developer on both sides.. you could put something like "if version number is greater than #.#.# then add on this slimmer code"


but i guess if your still up to the topic.. other candidates

emptyprofile -- i concider it a defficiency in the code that coranto will not natively empty an empty profile

linksmaker (parse ALL fields for links, not just textarea) did lawrence do this? it wasnt marked outdated

special links (specifying target) would probably be a natural extention of the previous one


these are "for thinking about" ideas
include template editor in the download.. because you can edit anything else, why not these? expecially if your initially suggesting to people to use these

and if you think "we shouldnt include addons"... then why include categories?
just like templates, categories were what coranto was designed to use, but optional


what out of these ideas can really be called bulk? since "too bulky" is what people say about including addons.. i think of it as covering up problem areas
..nuttier then a squirrel turd..
User avatar
InSAnE NiNjA
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:35 am

Postby Lumberjack » Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:04 pm

I would definitely agree about template editor being a core addon (like news categories). It is extremely useful, no need to ftp to make minor changes.
Lumberjack
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Postby bozoka45 » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:11 pm

I'll agree with Ninja, I dont think it would be a big deal if some addons were included in the download by default.

Also, now that a good lot of people are on broadband, I really dont think the download time would hurt that many people. Even if one is on dialup, its only another 1-2 minutes per addon, if that.
User avatar
bozoka45
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 8:38 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby Parahead » Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:08 pm

First off all I would like to say that by adding features to Coranto through addons it makes it possible to continue using old versions of Coranto and still take advantage of new functionality. Otherwise you would force people into upgrading. Using addons also makes it possible to involve more developers, since each addon is very limited in functionality and there is no need to poke around in the same core files. This is some of the reasons 1.24 has lasted so long as a stable release in my opinion. Anyway, on to your questions...

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:emptyprofile -- i concider it a defficiency in the code that coranto will not natively empty an empty profile
True, not empty a profile outputfile if no newsitems fit that profile would be considered a bug. Adding the functionality that the EmtpyProfile addon does into the core at the same time wouldn't be hard. I'll put it on the TODO-list.

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:linksmaker (parse ALL fields for links, not just textarea) did lawrence do this? it wasnt marked outdated
You do have the "Parse Links?"-option for the single line and textarea fields. Do you feel it is needed for any other type of fields as well?

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:special links (specifying target) would probably be a natural extention of the previous one
How would that work? Having a setting at the fields settingspage where you specify a target window name? I agree that this would be a good feature...

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:and if you think "we shouldnt include addons"... then why include categories?
just like templates, categories were what coranto was designed to use, but optional

what out of these ideas can really be called bulk? since "too bulky" is what people say about including addons.. i think of it as covering up problem areas
The call to include addons or not is not up to me, basically it is dragn's. I do see problems with including addons, not because of "too bulky" or download speed, just the simple fact that not all addons would be included, but then who to decide which to include and which not to? Also, Coranto is in theory Elvii's code but addons are not, the template editor is l0rdphi1's for example. Do you think that he want to have his addon included in the distribution package? And do dragn? For the housepeace I would say it is best not to include any more addons which isn't allready included. Personally I don't see it as that much work to browse the addon section and download the additional addons I want to use for my specific installation anyway? But once again, this really is dragn's call...
Yes, I am still around...
www.parahead.com/coranto/
User avatar
Parahead
 
Posts: 4837
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:54 pm
Location: Stockholm - Sweden

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby InSAnE NiNjA » Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:44 pm

Parahead wrote:First off all I would like to say that by adding features to Coranto through addons it makes it possible to continue using old versions of Coranto and still take advantage of new functionality. Otherwise you would force people into upgrading.


concidering the addons i chose... it would be the same as when "sort true alphabetical" expired, or same as how "isNewValue" is about to expire

Parahead wrote:
InSAnE NiNjA wrote:special links (specifying target) would probably be a natural extention of the previous one
How would that work? Having a setting at the fields settingspage where you specify a target window name? I agree that this would be a good feature...


i cant really think if this would be in coranto settings, field settings, or profile settings...
where does the addon set it up to be? i haven't used coranto on any of my own projects, in well over a year

Parahead wrote:The call to include addons or not is not up to me, basically it is dragn's. I do see problems with including addons, not because of "too bulky" or download speed, just the simple fact that not all addons would be included, but then who to decide which to include and which not to?


a combination of the main coder, the man in charge, and group suggestions


Parahead wrote:Also, Coranto is in theory Elvii's code but addons are not, the template editor is l0rdphi1's for example. Do you think that he want to have his addon included in the distribution package? And would dragn?


because of the value of this specific one.. i would say the options are, ask phi1, or from scratch, but really.. this was all just suggestions

side note: http://coranto.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=52664#52664
..nuttier then a squirrel turd..
User avatar
InSAnE NiNjA
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:35 am

Postby Lumberjack » Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:37 am

First off all I would like to say that by adding features to Coranto through addons it makes it possible to continue using old versions of Coranto and still take advantage of new functionality. Otherwise you would force people into upgrading

Agreed, there is no need to integrate most of these into the core. Perhaps some essentials yes, but even so it doesn't hurt to keep them as addons, perhaps easier to upgrade them later?
For the housepeace I would say it is best not to include any more addons which isn't allready included. Personally I don't see it as that much work to browse the addon section and download the additional addons

Perhaps a 'suggested addons' section to the documentation, for the most commonly used ones.
Lumberjack
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Postby Parahead » Wed Jun 29, 2005 6:31 am

NiNjA and LJ, I do think you have sound ideas in general. Some addons could be considered bugfixes rather than enhancements, some will make it into the core, some will not. I have brought up some of these discussions myself previously. Anyway, it is not up to me to decide how to proceed... Maybe you should bring this topic to dragn's attention if you want his view on this?

Lumberjack wrote:Perhaps a 'suggested addons' section to the documentation, for the most commonly used ones.
Yes, a good idea. Personally I have tried to focus on the core for the next beta (which actually is ready for release in my view) and leave the documentation to other people. If you feel up for it, please write such a section and I don't see any reason why not to either include it in the distribution or have it placed here at CTUS under the help section?
Yes, I am still around...
www.parahead.com/coranto/
User avatar
Parahead
 
Posts: 4837
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:54 pm
Location: Stockholm - Sweden

Postby Lumberjack » Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:24 pm

Hmm yes I may make a start on that if I get the time.
Lumberjack
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby bozoka45 » Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:10 pm

Parahead wrote:
InSAnE NiNjA wrote:emptyprofile -- i concider it a defficiency in the code that coranto will not natively empty an empty profile
True, not empty a profile outputfile if no newsitems fit that profile would be considered a bug. Adding the functionality that the EmtpyProfile addon does into the core at the same time wouldn't be hard. I'll put it on the TODO-list.


Just wanted to put a thought out on this regarding this thread.

If you read DaleRay's suggestion to me, I think it could work very well. If there is only one item in a profile, the item won't be updated unless Modify Time < Approval Time, thus leaving the old, unupdated item on there until a new one is improved. If Coranto were to automatically say "No new newsitems", than that would be displayed on the site until someone approved the modification.

That being said, I think it should be left as an addon to allow more functionality into Coranto.
User avatar
bozoka45
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 8:38 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby InSAnE NiNjA » Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:01 am

bozoka45 wrote:
Parahead wrote:
InSAnE NiNjA wrote:emptyprofile -- i concider it a defficiency in the code that coranto will not natively empty an empty profile
True, not empty a profile outputfile if no newsitems fit that profile would be considered a bug. Adding the functionality that the EmtpyProfile addon does into the core at the same time wouldn't be hard. I'll put it on the TODO-list.


Just wanted to put a thought out on this regarding this thread.

If you read DaleRay's suggestion to me, I think it could work very well. If there is only one item in a profile, the item won't be updated unless Modify Time < Approval Time, thus leaving the old, unupdated item on there until a new one is improved. If Coranto were to automatically say "No new newsitems", than that would be displayed on the site until someone approved the modification.

That being said, I think it should be left as an addon to allow more functionality into Coranto.


but which side of the problem can be fixed by pressing full build?
..nuttier then a squirrel turd..
User avatar
InSAnE NiNjA
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:35 am

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby bozoka45 » Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:31 am

InSAnE NiNjA wrote:
but which side of the problem can be fixed by pressing full build?


I dont understand your question.
User avatar
bozoka45
 
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 8:38 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: question about parahead's "coranto fixes" addo

Postby InSAnE NiNjA » Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:53 am

bozoka45 wrote:
InSAnE NiNjA wrote:but which side of the problem can be fixed by pressing full build?


I dont understand your question.


to fix the problem i mentioned, would require a bit of a tweak.. (not emptying profiles).. to fix your problem mentioned, would require pressing full build, and isnt it a problem that already exists?

it would not say "no new newsitems"... its the idea that when there are no items at all, coranto ignores the file and leaves newsitems in it instead of deleting them

such as if it were set to expire by day, and no recent items qualified to update the news.txt with.. it would just leave it as-is, which isnt a good thing
..nuttier then a squirrel turd..
User avatar
InSAnE NiNjA
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:35 am

Next

Return to Coranto 2.0 Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron