Community Concerns

jQuery is not a framework

ClipperCMS is awesome but way harder to sell than MODX®

AWESOME ---> you have ruined javascript http://codeofrob.com/entries/you-have-ruined-javascript.html

Think the question was about JS frameworks. Just looked it up for the ones I still use.
Craft: seems to be rolling their own library. Lots of jQuery/jQuery UI too.
ProcessWire: Also jQuery + UI

You know, ExtJS wouldn't be so bad if Form Customization actually did what it's supposed to do, and for all forms instead of just resources.

Add a field - if it isn't in the resource_extended_fields table, then ask to automatically add it, as well as re-writing the table's structure file, whatever that might be (personally I have no problem with xml, but PHP ini file format or JSON would work just as well). Processors would simply grab the fields from the POST and save them.

I know somebody who's working on an alternative Manager using a custom version of JQuery who has implemented AJAX auto-saving of all fields, not just in System Settings. It's really nice, and blazingly fast.

Quote from: alanpich at Jun 04, 2014, 04:35 PM

jQuery is not a framework

YES YES YES YES!!!

Quote from: mrhaw at Jun 04, 2014, 09:01 AM

AWESOME ---> you have ruined javascript http://codeofrob.com/entries/you-have-ruined-javascript.html

Yeah, let's just use jQuery and naive UI approaches to do every single app ever made because high level abstractions are never useful! Nobody will ever have to touch my code or potentially want to re-use portions of my crappy classes that I wrote from scratch because I'm a super l33t javascript programmer who one time made that one thing. Besides, I implemented my own naive event bus, semi-dirty checking, and anything else that sounded good at the time, why do I need a framework?

Besides, I went to college AGES ago. I don't want to have learn any semblance of modern programming ideas. If it's difficult, it's just not worth doing - we should just build an enterprise java app to do it instead. And yeah, those factory thingies are *soooo new* and were just awful in that one language that one time. I don't know why we don't just build everything in HTML 4.01 and XML with a java spring backend! That worked so well in 1993!

1. We should all be proud of the conversation started here. It has drawn together dispersed parties, and is a move towards consensus.
   
   We should be wary of personal issues clouding the conversation. In fact if love to see those particular posts moved to a new thread if possible.
   


2. The revitalising of this thread through Jason's contribution speaks volumes. The LLC leads this project, and despite more community involvement without the leadership from that side limited progress is made.
   
   I have no problem with this position, but it does require the leadership and communication we've all acknowledged as vital.
   
   I'm minded to agree that developing a Foundation is a complex process and that rushing could be problematic.
   


3. There are a number of solid, if high level, discussions going on around technology and features. I agree with most of the flaws highlighted in the existing architecture.
   
   The question is, what framework can we develop to structure these debates? What resource can the MODX Core team commit to these discussions to drive cohesion, contributions and progress.
   
   If no commitment can be made, what is the solution?
   
   The wider issue here will not be placated without action around this area. I for one favour positive steps, even if they're small rather than nothing.
   

• Content free from Templates
• Content free from the resource tree (if I want)
• Content types
• Content consisting exclusively of fields I determine (dropping the standard set of fields)
• Channels for large volumes of data and representation of that data within a tabular grid

...Well, there's actually two things I am disappointed with:

1. MODX 1 and 2 (Evo and Revo) are STILL discussed in the same forum. It's confusing and creates
a mess where people are answering wrong questions in the wrong thread. New users try to run Evo syntax in Revo etc.
I suggested a distinctive color change... In the days of EVO I could search the forums for API usage etc. now the results are mixed and no fun.

<li class="last clearfix"><a id="version" href="...

var ourVers = $("a#version").text().split(' ')[0]; 
if(ourVers == "Evo") { $("#version").css("color","red"); }

I played with the MODX Website and 2 lines of jQuery...

1. add id="version" to the last container nav > li > a

<li class="last clearfix"></li>[/quote]

That's a nice little move, I like that a lot, will have to think how I could utilize that myself.

However, pls remove http: from the call to googleapis.com, as per google documentation [ed. note: nuan88 last edited this post 9 years, 11 months ago.]

Can anyone advise where we go from here in relation to making MODX 3 a reality or even a start?
IE how do we get from 2.3 (which has yet to be released) to starting work on MODX 3 or even agreeing what 3 is and isn't?