UI (and other) changes in Revolution?

Regarding the package sizes, it will be much smaller in the distributions, this is just a consequence of working with the source code directly. Once the distribution builds are completed, there will be a traditional style package with all files in the legacy locations and without all the duplicated content in the core package (the contents of the core/packages/ directory). Following installation, you can remove the contents of the core/packages/ dir, but make sure it remains writable and if you plan to rerun setup again, you’ll need it back.

I have a hard time understanding the progress of 0.9.7. For example, if there were X development threads, where would I be able to see a summary of status (or est. % of completion) for each? Or, if there is another way you track development progress, please point me in the right direction.

I’m an IT manager, not a developer. I am, however, trying to assess the development timeline of 0.9.7 and how that impacts my plans. I hope to determine where I may be able to assign developer resources to contribute.

We would love to see additional contributors to 097. The best thing to do is to grab the latest SVN and start testing/filing bugs and fixing them by submitting patches at the Trac site for 097 (see my or Jason/Opengeek’s signature for details).

The hard part about gauging progress is that we are funding development on 097 by doing client projects. Client work has to take precedence so that food can also make it to the table. Giving a remotely accurate predictor of progress is about a likely to be accurate as predicting who will win the Superbowl in 10 years. We’d love to talk more about this with you and find out more about what type of resources you have available.

Quote from: rthrash at Dec 06, 2007, 10:00 AM

Content Tags

[[%language_string_key]] (new in 097)

I was curious about the new language content tags and didn’t fully understand what they were or how they could potentially be used.

For anyone interested, Jason informed me that particular content tag would be the equivalent of the following:



8)

What would the 0.9.7 equivalent be for 0.9.6’s Timing Tags:



I tried [[^qt]] (and even [[++qt]]), etc, but those didn’t to work... Will timing tags still be present 0.9.7+ ?

Update:
In reviewing the 0.9.7 DBAPI class, I do see where the values in question get set (as attributes of the xpdo object), however I am still tracking down whether or not these values get declared as timing tags or the like.




In modresponse.class.php (Line # 96) it appears timing tags are being set in the Legacy tag format!

$this->modx->resource->_output= str_replace("[^q^]", $queries, $this->modx->resource->_output);
$this->modx->resource->_output= str_replace("[^qt^]", $queryTime, $this->modx->resource->_output);
$this->modx->resource->_output= str_replace("[^p^]", $phpTime, $this->modx->resource->_output);
$this->modx->resource->_output= str_replace("[^t^]", $totalTime, $this->modx->resource->_output);
$this->modx->resource->_output= str_replace("[^s^]", $source, $this->modx->resource->_output);

Updating to the following should correct the issue upon building a case ’^’: statement in the parser:



Should I will update the SVN with these changes, or did we have another idea in mind?

ATM, the [^timing] tags are unchanged and handled separately from the parser to get the results recorded as close to the end of the execution of the process as possible (in order to reflect more accurate totals). I suppose they could be converted as well, though some discussion of these needs to occur, since only legacy queries through the DBAPI (which will be phased out after 0.9.7 release) really affect the query counts. It likely will require some additional coding so that all xPDO calls affect these numbers accurately with the new API usage.

Regarding $this->xpdo vs. $this->modx, in places where $this->xpdo is used, it generally means that the instance could be of either class: xPDO or modX (which extends xPDO). Best practice is to test the actual instance type using is_a() (instanceof would work if you are building for PHP 5 only) before assuming it is a modX instance and trying to access modX-specific functions or properties. You can always assume it is at least an xPDO instance though, meaning the functions and properties of the xPDO class will always be available. PLEASE NOTE HOWEVER, $this->xpdo is always going to be a modX instance in the case of the DBAPI service/extension (i.e. $modx->db); this is an exception to the rule and a simple oversight on my part.

@Jason, thank you for the feedback. In your opinion, do you think this is a direction worth heading?

Also, I tried the following tag in my template but did not get the expected results:

[[%error]] output nothing (empty)

even though english.inc.php contains:


???

I found the relevant parser code, but may need to look into modLexiconTag function to understand what’s going on...

Thx, Jason. Manually including the language file for the front-end took care of it!

The language file is not loaded on the front-end yet Mike; you would need to do that first. The architecture for doing so in a way that does not affect performance is TBD.

Quote from: OpenGeek at Jan 16, 2008, 02:09 PM

The language file is not loaded on the front-end yet Mike; you would need to do that first. The architecture for doing so in a way that does not affect performance is TBD.

Makes complete sense that is is not automatically included on the front end. (I am glad that is not) Thank you!

Hi, I’m pretty excited about the revolution of MODx, but I’m not very into this coding stuff. However I would like to ask, if there are any screenshots of the 0.9.7 manager interface? This interests me, because I’m a web designer. I’m not familiar with SVN very much, so I wish I could just glance at some simple JPG screenshots. Thank You.

P.S. I have few websites running on MODx, and thank god on MODx Great job! Looking forward to the official Revolutional release! Keep up the best work!