Tabless in future

Mary · 2007-09-05 13:52:32

Being given an answer you just happen to not like is a “rule of silence”?

Spreading “fear, uncertainty and death” doesn’t advance the kind of dialogue you want. I refer you back to what has been said:

..in 4.0.5 all tags that generate lists got a sort attribute, the ‘hide’ tag was added and a truckload of bugs were fixed (many pointed out by users, but also many found by internal code review). In 4.0.6, yet again a bunch of bugs will be fixed and yes, even a reasonable, asked for feature was added.

If there are still bugs (real bugs, not missing features) present in TXP 4.0.x that can be fixed while staying backwards compatible, please point them out. I don’t recall not fixing such bugs.

Changing the admin design (removing the unneeded tables) would no doubt break a bunch of plugins. That’s not something that should happen in a stable series. It kept people from upgrading to 4.0.4 or later despite the security fixes.

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 14:16:22

Nope, what i call the ‘rule of silence’, is devs not sharing insight on where crockery stands. (yet again three posts above)

Fearing the worse is also a pretty natural reaction to that kind of silence. How would you react, for instance, to Bush saying nothing but “we’re making progress” about Irak and not answering to questions about when it would end. Sorry, couldn’t find a less dramatic example :)

Not addressing those doubts i express certainly doesn’t help the case either. But hey, maybe I’m the only one that worries… On the other hand, I see amazing (and huge) plugins coming up (gbp_permlink, MLP,..) and can’t help but wonder how these guys could keep the motivation to restlessly improve them, when a new version that could as be here “ tomorrow, next month, in a few years, mwahahaha, you’ll never really know “ could break all that work at once. This isn’t a very pleasant environment to build upon, all I’m saying.

ruud · 2007-09-05 14:45:04

The fact that a new version will be released at some point does not mean that the 4.0.x series is suddenly dead and unusable. In fact, due to the fact that some things will break, I believe that the 4.0.x series will at the very least get security updates if and when needed so people can keep using it if they don’t need the 4.1 features.

PS. Strange comparison, because none of the developers is a known terrorist, so there’s no reason to fear us ;)

Gocom · 2007-09-05 14:54:22

guiguibonbon wrote:

On the other hand, I see amazing (and huge) plugins coming up (gbp_permlink, MLP,..) and can’t help but wonder how these guys could keep the motivation to restlessly improve them, when a new version that could as be here “ tomorrow, next month, in a few years, mwahahaha, you’ll never really know “ could break all that work at once. This isn’t a very pleasant environment to build upon, all I’m saying.

If they break, someone other plugin-developer could help (like me)
What is the point publishing upcoming release-dates, because you can’t carantee that the new version is ready to that date. More important is make everything, the whole thing, ready. No hurries, no stress and pain.
And one thing more to ask. Are you American? :D Just kidding but my curiousity woke when you talked about Bush. I hate Bush, as like many others do.

Cheers!

Last edited by Gocom (2007-09-05 14:56:01)

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 15:29:15

Are you American?

Haha, no, I’m definitely not American. Belgian to the bone ;)

If they break, someone other plugin-developer could help

That’s the theory, the reality being that there’s not that many plugin devs, and those two plugins I just mentioned have been lying half-dead for a few months now. That’s another issue though, but it does lead to the fact that when 4.1 comes out, it will take quite some time before it has the same number of plugins as now.

More important is make everything, the whole thing ready.

That’s exactly what I’m arguing against. I’d have it upgraded little by little. The RERO mentality.

What is the point is publishing upcoming release-dates, because you can’t carantee that the new version is ready to that date.

Actually, I don’t need to know when. I’d just like them to acknowledge there’s still a bucket-load of things they’d like to do, and stop acting like it’ll be done tomorrow. 4.0.x is what we’ll have to work with for quite some time, yet they are reluctant to improve it too much. Imagine what textpattern would look like had all the energy put into crockery been divided up in little chunks added to the current branch.

The other thing I’m trying to point out is that crockery is not being developed with plugin devs in mind, while textpattern is usually pretty much useless without plugins. Getting rid of tables is the first thing that should have been done, not the last one.

I’m not dismissing all of the devs work though, I think they’re doing a great job for the most part. [joke]They just need a new manager [/joke]

Last edited by guiguibonbon (2007-09-05 15:44:20)

Gocom · 2007-09-05 15:47:28

guiguibonbon,

I agree. In some parts you are absolutely correctly, in my opinion. But the restyling of the adminpanel is quite difficult project – not as by redone of (X)HTML and CSS, but what becomes to plugins. Many plugins would break up. Well, they would be fixed easily althought, by replacing replacement-ids (or what you call them in English).

Reastyling would make adminpanel more fexible and usable – for plugin coders too, because those tables, inside tables make things quite hard. Styling idless td-element – it is a freaking fun, isn’t it?

PS. I missed my calculations by length of Atlantic Ocean :P Belgium, ahh the good old Belgium.

Cheers!

Last edited by Gocom (2007-09-05 15:55:24)

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 15:52:02

But the restyling of the adminpanel is quite difficult project – not as by redone of (X)HTML and CSS, but what becomes to plugins

Exactly. And it is planned for crockery, except it seems to be last thing that’s going to be done. Which means we’ll have to wait untill the very end before we can update plugins to the new interface. We should already be able to work on that right now.

Mary · 2007-09-05 15:53:26

I believe that the 4.0.x series will at the very least get security updates if and when needed so people can keep using it if they don’t need the 4.1 features.

Security updates and bug fixes for the foreseeable future. That has been our intent and remains so. I’ve said this many, many times before, but it bears saying again: the idea is to make 4.0.x as stable as possible, to make sure it is “future-safe” (within reason, obviously) so people other than the tech-savvy will want to use it.

There are several things in 4.0.x that definitely need “fixing” which aren’t true bugs, just confusing or touchy (like ‘sticky’ articles, for instance). Fixing them properly could easily break behviour that others depend upon, and you don’t break one person’s site to add feature improvements to another.

…crockery is not being developed with plugin devs in mind…

If you don’t know what’s happening in crockery (which is what you’ve said), then you’ve got no basis to make assumptions about what it does and doesn’t contain, do you? nevermind trying to assert what any one developer is thinking at a given moment in time.

We can’t work on all things, all the time, all at once. Things get worked on as we have the time. You’re not the first person to offer advice on how you think we should approach things, and I sadly daresay you won’t be the last. If we’re not working on one thing at any particular moment in time, one “group” get miffed (“Do this first, not that!”). If we’re working on something else, another group does (“You shouldn’t work on that right now, but this!”). We’re human, not super-computers.

Crockery is upgraded little by little. It simply won’t have a stable release until we’re satisfied that enough has been added to warrant doing so.

Having tables only makes developing admin-side plugins a little more difficult, not impossible. I speak from experience. It’s not the end of the world that they happen to still be there today and will still be there tomorrow. When we’re coming up to them disappearing in crockery, those who need to know (plugin devs) will be told, just as we’ve told them before.

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 16:33:49

If you don’t know what’s happening in crockery (which is what you’ve said)

Where have I said that? I check the svn regularly, so I do have basic knowledge of what has been done (but updating that HISTORY.txt file from time to time would be nice). What I have said is that we, users, have no idea what will stay, what not, and above all what else is going to change.

nevermind trying to assert what any one developer is thinking at a given moment in time.

No need to read minds. I think “should I wait for crockery ?” is what many plugin devs are wondering. But, yes, who knows, maybe I’m wrong.

Having tables only makes developing admin-side plugins a little more difficult, not impossible. I speak from experience.

Totally agree. But you’ll have to agree that at one point it will have to be fixed. And that’s not what I had in mind when I said crockery is not being developed with plugin devs in mind. I’m thinking of all the plugins that will be broke. The sooner that can be prepared, the better.

It’s not the end of the world that they happen to still be there today and will still be there tomorrow.

It will be if you don’t include this in the first release of 4.1, yet plan on including it later.

Crockery is upgraded little by little. It simply won’t have a stable release until we’re satisfied that enough has been added to warrant doing so.

Why? Is this a beauty contest or something? Is it about who has the most impressive releases?

4.1.0 shouldn’t have that many bells and whistles, it should mainly include all the stuff that needed mending yet couldn’t because it would break sites and plugins. I’d keep the rest for later releases.

Last edited by guiguibonbon (2007-09-05 16:39:43)

ruud · 2007-09-05 16:49:56

I think “should I wait for crockery ?” is what many plugin devs are wondering

I think that you’re projecting your own thoughts on the rest of the plugin devs.
No, you should not wait for crockery (or 4.0.6 for that matter). Now is what matters.

But you’ll have to agree that at one point it will have to be fixed. And that’s not what I had in mind when I said crockery is not being developed with plugin devs in mind. I’m thinking of all the plugins that will be broke.

Sure it will have to be fixed… but seriously, do you really think it takes that much time to update a plugin for such a backend change? I think not. Also, some plugins will no longer be needed in 4.1, so there’s no need to fix those plugins. I’m guessing the amount of plugins that would break by switching to a tableless design is minimal. Doing so in 4.0.x would have a larger impact.

4.1.0 shouldn’t have that many bells and whistles

What bells and whistles are you talking about?

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 17:16:45

What bells and whistles are you talking about?

Most of these, actually, for a starter (ok, maybe not nested sections and the new database query functions). Rewriting the whole section-admin. Hell, most of what I’ve read so far you’re planning to add. Many are nice, but certainly not a priority. What I would love to be able to work with already is the new parser, the new image-class, the exclude attribute, nested categories that work,….

No, you should not wait for crockery (or 4.0.6 for that matter). Now is what matters.

We’ve been waiting to tackle image management, admin-looks etc. for ages, yet the conclusion is always ‘those will be done in crockery’. So here we are, waiting.

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 17:33:19

Also, some plugins will no longer be needed in 4.1, so there’s no need to fix those plugins.

I think those are rarely back-end plugins.

do you really think it takes that much time to update a plugin for such a backend change?

Not on its own, no, but together with all the other changes, yes. That’s why I’m suggesting you start off as early as possible with a release (or candidate) that includes all the changes that will break stuff. That way everyone will be prepared. Don’t delay the hard pill, make it quick to swallow.

Last edited by guiguibonbon (2007-09-05 17:33:35)

ruud · 2007-09-05 17:50:24

Not nearly all the changes that might break stuff are in crockery at the moment.
Personally, I think ‘release early, release often’ is nice for some software projects, but not for all.

Btw, the history file hasn’t been updated since the end of 2005, so that’s not really an accurate source of info on the state of crockery.

guiguibonbon · 2007-09-05 17:57:56

Not nearly all the changes that might break stuff are in crockery at the moment.

That’s exactly what I’m pinpointing here. That’s where it should all have started.

Personally, I think ‘release early, release often’ is nice for some software projects, but not for all.

If you guys are sure about your stuff, so be it :) Let’s hope you’re right and I’m too easily worried. (But please, don’t be too precautious with 4.0.x)

Btw, the history file hasn’t been updated since the end of 2005, so that’s not really an accurate source of info on the state of crockery.

I know (see above); it was just an easy place to start. Please update it though, that would be cool.

Last edited by guiguibonbon (2007-09-05 18:00:48)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#16 2007-09-05 13:52:32

Re: Tabless in future

#17 2007-09-05 14:16:22

Re: Tabless in future

#18 2007-09-05 14:45:04

Re: Tabless in future

#19 2007-09-05 14:54:22

Re: Tabless in future

#20 2007-09-05 15:29:15

Re: Tabless in future

#21 2007-09-05 15:47:28

Re: Tabless in future

#22 2007-09-05 15:52:02

Re: Tabless in future

#23 2007-09-05 15:53:26

Re: Tabless in future

#24 2007-09-05 16:33:49

Re: Tabless in future

#25 2007-09-05 16:49:56

Re: Tabless in future

#26 2007-09-05 17:16:45

Re: Tabless in future

#27 2007-09-05 17:33:19

Re: Tabless in future

#28 2007-09-05 17:50:24

Re: Tabless in future

#29 2007-09-05 17:57:56

Re: Tabless in future

Board footer