Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#1 2012-10-05 08:09:08
- AdamK
- Member
- From: Kraków, Poland
- Registered: 2009-08-11
- Posts: 47
cnk_versioning on steroids
Ok. I believe everyone designer, who has played with cnk_versioning knows the power of this plugin. In fact I cannot imagine a quick and efficient work with TXP without it: Sublime Text 2 + sftp plugin my side and cnk_versioning server side brings the Heaven to the Earth ;)
Unfortunately I found it broken again (it’s PHP issue I believe now) :(
My proposal: as cnk_versioning is a problematic, orphaned plugin with problems arising with every major (and many minor) PHP and TXP updates, what about merging the functionality to TXP core?
There is an interface, I suppose, which reads forms, pages and css from DB. If you could separate data provider from the method itself, you would be able to ask
“give me the page/css/form named ‘default’ now!”
and the provider, according to settings, would either serve it from DB or from file (or from URL —- think Dropbox shared Public folder or GitHub hosted file).
Adding an option “Production stage: move all/(chosen?) forms to database” would be nice, as well as just “move all external sources to DB” button.
A.
P.S. as a partial solution for the broken cnk_versioning, I’m developing a tiny python script, which monitors local filesystem and pushes the changes directly to DB via ssh tunell. It seems a perfect solution – with all the power of python (you can do anything you want with the files before sending, any preprocessing you can imagine, and of course scss, my love…), but it’s not universal due to obvious hosting limitations…
Last edited by AdamK (2012-10-05 09:52:07)
Offline
Re: cnk_versioning on steroids
Good idea :)
I ran something similar past Stef a while back (and had forgotten about it) it was similar, but adding a section hierarchy for forms with on/off switches so you can turn templates/themes on/off in one go… it was more involved – I’ll try dig it out
That is the only drawback I found with cnk_versioning – you are really limited to one theme/template per site
Last edited by tye (2012-10-05 10:09:27)
Offline
Re: cnk_versioning on steroids
+1.
Indeed, to take advantage of a Version Control System like Git or Svn with Txp, or simply want to work with a text editor cnk_versioning is now essential.
For me, this is a major plugin. And the fact that it is in an unstable position is not a good thing for Textpattern.
Number of developers who test Txp are surprised to have to work from the back office.
And “Txp” does not allow an agency to work collaboratively and versioning project.
I think an option to include in the core, or officially maintain this plugin and make it more visible would be a very good thing.
Offline
Re: cnk_versioning on steroids
Agreed. But we are already looking at custom fields and multiple categories (and maybe sub-sections) for Textpattern core 4.6 features, along with various other improvements, so I don’t think there is room to incorporate this large piece of functionality as well during the 4.6 cycle.
I’ll keep it on the list of “nice to have’s” for the future though.
Offline
#5 2012-10-08 10:22:31
- Algaris
- Member
- From: England
- Registered: 2006-01-27
- Posts: 535
Re: cnk_versioning on steroids
I agree and would love for this plugin to become part of the core, as I couldn’t imagine using Textpattern without it now. Though as Phil says custom fields and multiple categories should take priority.
Offline
#6 2012-11-09 19:58:38
- jeroen
- Member
- From: brussels.be
- Registered: 2012-06-15
- Posts: 16
Re: cnk_versioning on steroids
I made my first txp site without, my second with this plugin.
I had no idea it was unstable (works fine on txp 4.5.2 on PHP 5.3.6) and I would miss it dearly.
so +1 on adding it to the core (maybe push it from “nice to have’s” to “f#ck yeah, we’re doing this!” list? :) )
Offline
#7 2012-11-12 09:59:38
- Algaris
- Member
- From: England
- Registered: 2006-01-27
- Posts: 535
Re: cnk_versioning on steroids
I agree with your sentiment but for the time being I believe there are more important things to concentrate on such as custom fields and multiple categories for the 4.6 release. As much as I (really, really) want this I’d rather have those first.
Offline