[mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

Bloke · 2011-01-16 17:20:47

jsoo wrote:

currently evaluating the feasibility of migrating to a new code base

Yeah, fun all round. And part of the reason a new repo hasn’t appeared on SVN at the moment (the other being that we’re considering Mercurial or another versioning system but Google Code doesn’t appear to allow both that and SVN at the same time, and we’re not sure of the impact on the existing repos if we start a new repo using a different system. Moving the TXP 5 repo elsewhere is also an option of course. Which would further explain why you can’t see one on Google Code right now :-)

Last edited by Bloke (2011-01-16 17:21:13)

philwareham · 2011-01-17 11:54:26

On OT – Textpattern sits in a comfortable place for me between WordPress at the low end and Drupal at the high end when building a site. The tag-based system within Textpattern I feel is more flexible than Wordpress in building a complete bespoke medium-sized business site.

On the other hand Wordpress is great when building a quick, cheap, good looking site for a client – just purchase one of the many professional themes and customise accordingly.

Regarding the awful ‘out of the box’ look on current Textpattern installs, I’ve offered to help build some front-end templates when TXP5 development gets underway, though the enthusiasm from others failed to materialise so I have not proceeded any further.

Bloke · 2011-01-17 12:15:17

philwareham wrote:

Regarding the awful ‘out of the box’ look on current Textpattern installs, I’ve offered to help build some front-end templates when TXP5 development gets underway

And yours (and other) templates are very welcome. The out of the box look will be changing and I’d certainly like to take the design elements presented thus far and give the default theme a well overdue facelift. Perhaps with ~cXc~’s new template system and jsoo’s default template idea (on install) we can really start to tackle this area.

In the meantime we have a little hump to leap over before we figure out how to piece all the stuff together. Please don’t be discouraged if it appears we’re not attentive enough: the eyes and ears of TXP are very much open, it just takes a while for the hands to catch up :-)

philwareham · 2011-01-17 12:23:46

Bloke wrote:

jsoo’s default template idea (on install)

Is there a link to what this is, I’m intrigued to find out any developments so far?

Cheers,
Phil

Bloke · 2011-01-17 12:36:22

philwareham wrote:

Is there a link

Sure — buried among the ideas on the first page of that thread before it started going off at a tangent. I’m not sure how far it got — I believe Jeff had a proof of concept up and running somewhere but he’ll be able to tell you more. I thought it was a great idea and if there were packaged themes easily available (as ~cXc~ seems to be advocating) then one could easily see people rolling their own TXP installs by uploading some packages along with their core files and just choosing one on install. And using the template manager plugin to switch themes further down the line.

Maybe hosted TXP services can then come of age…?

The on-install option would also be great for people (like me) who customise their installations and delete fluff, set up standard Templates and Forms, etc. I could make a template and save it as my baseline. Bliss. (EDIT: I know there are ways to do it using cnk_versioning or merging files into the core but it’s more hassle than I’m prepared to put up with).

Last edited by Bloke (2011-01-17 12:38:00)

jsoo · 2011-01-17 14:17:09

Bloke wrote:

I’m not sure how far it got — I believe Jeff had a proof of concept up and running somewhere but he’ll be able to tell you more.

I haven’t done anything with it since submitting it to txp-dev — there were no responses, a pretty good indication of lack of interest ;), and what people really want is public-side theme switching on existing sites, not just during installation. But I still have the code, of course, if it would be useful. It was only ever conceived as something to use if either:

there were no plans for an integrated public-side theme switcher, or;
there are such plans but a stop-gap is needed.

hcgtv · 2011-01-17 14:21:03

Bloke wrote:

Perhaps with ~cXc~’s new template system and jsoo’s default template idea (on install) we can really start to tackle this area.

Any template system via a plugin has to deal with the core issues that I brought up almost 4 years ago, and hard coded forms have to be dealt with. A plugin can go so far, the core has to meet it halfway.

Bloke wrote:

The on-install option would also be great for people (like me) who customise their installations and delete fluff, set up standard Templates and Forms, etc. I could make a template and save it as my baseline. Bliss.

Following the Debian analogy, Debian being the basis for so many distros, due to it’s slow methodical upgrade process, I’m using Textpattern core to roll my own version. After following Textpattern for so many years, I’ve come to the conclusion that you have to roll up your sleeves and have at it.

Bloke · 2011-01-17 14:46:40

hcgtv wrote:

Any template system via a plugin has to deal with the core issues

Yep. Taking a digital AK-47 to the existing hard-coded Pages and Forms (on new installations) is part of the new public-side default template goals.

Comments should, imho, be relegated to a (core-sanctioned) plugin that you can choose to include during install or add later. The vast swathe of comment tags and comment forms need serious pruning. Whether these happen or not will be down to resources. Perhaps it’ll all come out in the wash when we’ve figured out a few more details.

I raised a thread ages ago on possible avenues of approach for the comments system but forgot about it and let it fall by the wayside. Might be outdated now but I think Gocom made a start on some refactorisation of the core comment tags.

maverick · 2011-01-17 15:03:34

Bloke wrote:

Google Code doesn’t appear to allow both that and SVN at the same time, and we’re not sure of the impact on the existing repos if we start a new repo using a different system.

If Mercurial is preferred for going forward, and the desire is to stay with Google Code, why not convert the existing repos to Mercurial as well?

Bloke · 2011-01-17 15:16:24

maverick wrote:

why not convert the existing repos to Mercurial as well?

This sentence: “If want to migrate your whole history, the process is much more involved” scares me and sounds like a lot of work, compared with leaving the existing repos alone and starting a new one somewhere else :-)

maverick · 2011-01-17 15:40:52

Bloke wrote:

Comments should, imho, be relegated to a (core-sanctioned) plugin that you can choose to include during install or add later.

In the past I was nervous when this idea has been suggested.

Minor: It meant yet another plugin
While commenting may not be a universal need, it seems too important to risk letting it fall by the wayside of neglect

However, I’m completely supportive of the idea these days.

As noted in other threads, Textpattern is meant to be a broadly focused CMS, not just a blogging CMS. Not every one needs comments.
Commenting is part of the core, but hasn’t received a lot of attention anyway (not a criticism – just an observation). So being part of the core doesn’t guarantee active development.
A basic core-sanctioned plugin means at least basic functionality will continue
I already usually add several plugins to make commenting more powerful/useful on sites requiring comment functionality.
If Txp’s core was refactored to enable robust feedback plugins, we are more likely to see several other plugins pop up – with different capabilities, etc. I can envision (but not code) a plugin that could make comments robust enough that it could be used as a light weight forum. (I know there’s some code out there already to that end ;) ).

So, Stef, I hope the you guys go for it on this change.

Last edited by maverick (2011-01-17 15:42:09)

maverick · 2011-01-17 15:47:41

Bloke wrote:

compared with leaving the existing repos alone and starting a new one somewhere else :-)

fair enough :-D

Enough of our active plugin developers are on GitHub, I’m sure that has come up, and offers synergies. So moving from Google Code to somewhere else is promising.

But I’ve read that for those on Windows platforms git is not as good of an experience as Mercurial. Which is a drawback I’m assuming (since one or more of our devs are on Windows)?

Last edited by maverick (2011-01-17 15:48:32)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#13 2011-01-16 17:20:47

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#14 2011-01-17 11:54:26

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#15 2011-01-17 12:15:17

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#16 2011-01-17 12:23:46

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#17 2011-01-17 12:36:22

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#18 2011-01-17 14:17:09

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#19 2011-01-17 14:21:03

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#20 2011-01-17 14:46:40

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#21 2011-01-17 15:03:34

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#22 2011-01-17 15:16:24

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#23 2011-01-17 15:40:52

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

#24 2011-01-17 15:47:41

Re: [mention] Wordpress < > Textpattern

Board footer