Quote from: vhollo at Sep 05, 2008, 03:05 PM
Different thing: my multiple instances solution (http://modxcms.com/forums/index.php/topic,27971.0.html) is fully backward compatible but its parameter names ’&instance’ could be ’&id’ and ’­’ could be ’&hide’ or something more speaking. (These parameters are optional.) This addition in it’s two versions had been downloaded for 37 times to date.
Do you think that it should be part of the release line by adding it to the svn?
You might want to create a branch in SVN to install that in and let people test it to see if there are any side effects first. If it doesn’t cause any issues, it can then be merged into the trunk. Or maybe it’s been tested enough. The question is whether the downloaders actually tested it. I downloaded it but haven’t had time to try it.
Quote from: sottwell at Dec 03, 2007, 03:09 AM
I have added the ability to use an external config file instead of long involved parameter lists in the snippet call.
I added this block of code at the very beginning of the snippet code:
**
* Dec 3 2007 sottwell
* Use an external file instead of parameters in the snippet call
* Add "config" folder to the assets/snippets/webloginpe folder
* Put your name.config.php file there with a list of parameters
* $lang = 'de';
* $type = 'users';
* etc...
* Use &config=`name` in the snippet call
* [!WebLoginPE? &config=`usersde`!]
* The file 'assets/snippets/webloginpe/config/usersde.config.php' will be loaded.
*/
if(isset($config)) {
if(file_exists('assets/snippets/webloginpe/config/'.$config.'.config.php')) {
include_once 'assets/snippets/webloginpe/config/'.$config.'.config.php';
}
}
This has not been tested extensively, but if the lines in the config file follow the same pattern as the snippet parameters there should be no difference. The parameter processing code in the snippet should just see the variables as if they had come from the parameter list.
@Soshite - from the first post:
This thread should be used by advanced users providing code patches and fixes for WebLoginPE 1.3.0.
-sD-
Dr. Scotty Delicious, DFPA.
this little usefull addition should be included in the next version!
Thanks,
Bruno
-
☆ A M B ☆
- 24,524 Posts
I would rather see these as separate snippets; otherwise the WebLoginPE core is going to get seriously bloated with all the conditions and the code for dealing with them.
I’m uneasy enough about having all the features it’s got already. Clean and mean and modular would be much better (in my opinion, anyway).
-
MODX Staff
- 12,272 Posts
You might look at how Ditto does extenders.
Ryan Thrash, MODX Co-Founder
Follow me on Twitter at @rthrash or catch my occasional unofficial thoughts at thrash.me
I think eForm events work really well to in running a snippet. I’ve been thinking of a while how nice it would be to have a simple eForm -> CRUD tool that has the similar ’events’ as eform.
Quote from: Soshite at Sep 17, 2008, 05:13 PM
Quote from: sottwell at Sep 16, 2008, 10:41 PM
I would rather see these as separate snippets; otherwise the WebLoginPE core is going to get seriously bloated with all the conditions and the code for dealing with them.
I’m uneasy enough about having all the features it’s got already. Clean and mean and modular would be much better (in my opinion, anyway).
Hmm. Maybe we could strip some of the bloat out of WLPE and have them as "add-ons" to the script.
How to make it easy to add those in would be an issue. Doing something like a installer .exe that allows the user to check off what parts they want in it would be cool, but with all of the different versions, I dunno what the file size would be.
Is there a way to write a script to do diff checks to a "clean" WLPE file, and add in the code?
SVN gives you the option of making a patch (or applying a patch) that will update existing files. It’s really easy but the catch is that the user would have to have SVN to apply the patch.
