October 2006 - Development - lists.drupal.org

More than one thread per list - Ignore the other I posted with this title. I goofed.
by Michelle Cox 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

I sent a quick correction after I realized I missed a paste in my last post but, for some reason, that didn't make it to the list. So I'm re-posting with what I _meant_ to post in the first place. Note: I changed the topic so I don't derail the distro thread with this Moshe said: As an aside (i.e. lets not sidetrack this thread), one of the original visions of the new .info files is that their names and descriptions will be used by drupal.org project module. Thats one of the reasons we chose plain text .ini instead of PHP. I like reuse of .info files because it centralizes project metadata. We probably need some more metadata fields. Someone on the completely unrealted linux thread said: > It is sad to see this discussion side-tracked. The purpose of this > discussion is NOT to debate why packagers exist (that is not what Seemant > asked for), but to figure out how we can better cooperate. The world > doesn't care about your opinion about packagers; whatever it is you think > about them, they are not going to go away. So if you're not going to > help make Drupal better for packagers, don't add noise to the discussion > either. It would be a waste of time and bits. Thanks. Michelle said (to Moshe): > This isn't a sidetrack; it's an important point. If the current project descriptions will be overwritten by the .info files, then there's no > point spending time now cleaning up the text itself. There's still tagging needing to be done, but I don't want to be changing the ? > project description if it's all getting wiped out soon. Jonathan said: >It's a good point, but it really is sidetracked from the original request. >Also, you're directly ignoring Dries' polite request not to add noise to >the discussion (I'm not singling you out personally). This point should >be a separate thread. Excuse me? I did no such thing. This email you are quoting is from my "Documenting contribs" thread and has nothing to do with the linux distros. I certainly hope you're not suggesting the dev list be confined to one discussion thread at a time. I seriously doubt that's what Dries had in mind with his request. Michelle

1 0

multisite technical question
by VJ Rao 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

Hi, I have a multisite install where Im sharing content (nodes) , taxonomy and users. (I am only not sharing the following tables : menu, cache, variable, accesslog, watchdog) I present content to different websites based on tags (for example subdomain1.example.com will only present blogs tagged under vocabulary subdomain1 , similar functionality for subdomain2.example.com etc..cross tagged content will appear on both sites) The problem Im facing is with search...I want anonymous users on subdomain1.example.com to only see content tagged under subdomain1 while searching. Is there anyway to achieve this? I have installed TAC but setting permissions for anonymous users on a per site basis is not possible... Is there anything else I can be trying? There is a way to change 'anonymous' user per site on administer->settings...but that only seems to change the name Thanks, VJ

1 0

Re: [development] Documenting contribs
by Michelle Cox 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

On 10/25/2006 1:13:11 PM, Moshe Weitzman (weitzman(a)tejasa.com) wrote: > i think it is within the spirit for site maintainers to improve project > descriptions as they see fit, and without prior approval from module > maintainers. an after the fact email like: 'i > fixed your stink' is > sufficient. maintainer could always edit again if needed. LOL! > As an aside (i.e. lets not sidetrack this thread), one of the original > visions of the new .info files is that their names and descriptions will > be > used by drupal.org project module. Thats one of the reasons we chose plain > text .ini instead of PHP. I like reuse of .info files because it > centralizes > project metadata. We probably need some more metadata fields. This isn't a sidetrack; it's an important point. If the current project descriptions will be overwritten by the .info files, then there's no point spending time now cleaning up the text itself. There's still tagging needing to be done, but I don't want to be changing the project description if it's all getting wiped out soon. Is that the case, or am I misunderstanding you? Michelle

1 0

Re: [development] Revenge of Themetastic
by Jason Flatt 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

On Wednesday 25 October 2006 08:03, Trae McCombs wrote: > haha, I thought the same thing. :) Still a nifty tool though. > Oh, yes. I whole-heartedly agree that it's a nifty tool, and I am looking forward to utilizing it. I did kind of leave that idea hanging in my previous message. -- Jason Flatt http://www.oadae.net/ Father of Six: http://www.flattfamily.com/ (Joseph, 13; Cramer, 11; Travis, 9; Angela; Harry, 5; and William, 12:04 am, 12-29-2005) Linux User: http://www.sourcemage.org/ Drupal Fanatic: http://drupal.org/

2 2

Re: [development] Default core theme
by Michelle Cox 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

I used it for one site. I'm not a designer and I found it pretty easy to work with. I'm actually thinking of using it for a theme in the next few weeks if nothing better materializes before then. Michelle On 10/25/2006 11:55:24 AM, Khalid B (kb(a)2bits.com) wrote: > I have not seen anyone mention pros or cons of the Foundation > theme by Rowan Kerr. > > http://drupal.org/project/foundation > > This is a pure CSS, one, two or three column layout, and is only > a foundation to build on. > > I know that Trae uses it and likes it as a base.

2 1

Revenge of Themetastic
by Steven Wittens 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

For those who complain that the font is too light, or the theme is too blue, ... http://drupal.org/node/88202#comment-149214 Steven Wittens

3 2

Re: [development] Revenge of Themetastic
by Kobus Myburgh 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

Holy SMOKES! This is AMAZING! Well done Steven and Stefan! I... NEED... THEMETASTIC...! Kobus >>> steven(a)acko.net 10/25/2006 1:01:43 PM >>> For those who complain that the font is too light, or the theme is too blue, ... http://drupal.org/node/88202#comment-149214 Steven Wittens

2 1

Slight API change in 4.6.10 and 4.7.4
by Heine Deelstra 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

The 4.6.10 and 4.7.4 releases saw the addition of a new default form field to protect against cross site request forgeries. This has consequences for 1. 4.6 modules and themes that output raw HTML forms Those forms will always fail for authenticated users. 2. 4.7 modules and themes that rely on a defined set of form fields to be present Certain modules and themes output only specific form fields. As they do not output the form_token, the form will always fail validation for authenticated users. In addition, certain modules unset a few form fields, then save the remainder of the form. These modules need to account for the new field. Tip: devise something robust. See for details: Converting 4.6.9 modules to 4.6.10 <http://drupal.org/node/90004> Converting 4.7.3 modules to 4.7.4 <http://drupal.org/node/89999> Converting 4.6.x themes to 4.6.10 <http://drupal.org/node/90021> Converting 4.7.x themes to 4.7.4 <http://drupal.org/node/90024> Kind regards, Heine Deelstra

15 25

Question regarding sort and order parameters?
by Richard Morse 24 Oct '06

24 Oct '06

Hi! I asked this a while ago in the forums, but nobody seems to have responded, so I thought (unless this isn't an appropriate venue?) that I would re-ask it here, in the hopes of someone having an answer... I'm working on a module which lists the profile information of users in one table. The list can be searched, sorted, and different columns can be displayed. Right now, I'm using the "tablesort_sql" stuff to handle the sorting. I use a GET form to display and search parameters around, so that when the sorting is done, it retains the display and search options. However, I can't find some way to make the forms retain the sorting information. The "sort" and "order" parameters, which are added by the tablesort_sql / table stuff, get lost when I submit a form with any changes. If I try preserving the values in the form, so that they get resubmitted, they get saved as "edit['sort']" and "edit['order']", which isn't what I want. Is there some way for me to preserve extra query parameters which are not a part of the edit array? Thanks, Ricky

1 0

docs for creating new groups of admin menu items
by Peter Wolanin 24 Oct '06

24 Oct '06

On the converting 4.7.x modules to 5.x page: http://drupal.org/node/64279#administration in the "new administration layout" section I think there was a problem. In order to be useful, I think this example code: <?php $items[] = array( 'path' => 'admin/settings', 'title' => t('site configuration'), 'description' => t('Adjust basic site configuration options.'), 'position' => 'right', 'weight' => -5, 'callback' => 'system_settings_overview', 'access' => $access); ?> should be something like (note especially the path and callback): <?php $items[] = array( 'path' => 'admin/my_settings', 'title' => t('My module configuration'), 'description' => t('Adjust my module configuration options.'), 'position' => 'right', 'weight' => -5, 'callback' => 'system_admin_menu_block_page', 'access' => $access); ?> based on my efforts just now making patches for og.module and og_mandatory_group.module. I changed the handbook page, but could someone more familiar with this new adminitrative layout please confirm? -Peter

1 0