- Development - lists.drupal.org

[drupal-devel] Re: [drupal-infrastructure] [Drupal.org website problem] Unformattedtext in 'Installing Drupal'
by Kobus Myburgh 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

I have the same problem, using Windows XP, IE. I don't have edit permissions, so can't fix. Regards, Kobus >>> <alan.prescott(a)njp.co.uk> 10/5/2005 11:49:44 AM >>> Alan Prescott sent a message using the contact form at http://drupal.org/contact: http://drupal.org/node/260 produces the install instructions without any paragraph formatting etc. which makes it difficult to read (SuSE Linux 9.3 + Konqueror, Firefox; Win2K + Firefox) With Win2K+IE6.0 the side panels are also missing -- [ Infrastructure | http://lists.drupal.org/listinfo/infrastructure ]

1 0

[drupal-devel] Leaving CivicSpace
by neil＠civicspacelabs.org 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

I left my position as Drupal developer at CivicSpace. The CivicSpace development team under Kieran's leadership is doing quite well and will continue to produce good software without me. Once my current project, update.php, is finished, I will be spending less time on Drupal development. I intend to stay involved in the Drupal community and there is a large chance that future paid work will be Drupal-related. My attendance at the upcoming Drupal conference in Amsterdam was to be paid for by CivicSpace. I will now not be going. Watch http://delocalizedham.com/ to see what I do next.

4 3

Re: [drupal-infrastructure] Fwd: [drupal-devel] Taxonomy Access Module Takeover
by Karoly Negyesi 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

>> User keve has asked to take over the taxonomy_access module, since I >> don't have time to maintain it. Can an admin transfer it to him? Tell keve please to rework taxonomy access, if possible to not patch 4.7 core. I will help him in every possible way re. db_rewrite_sql. I also was thinking on stepping up as a maintainer but, to tell you frankly, I am very happy that I does not need to. Regards NK

2 1

[drupal-devel] Bug#331808: FWD: Bug#331808: drupal depends on debconf without | debconf-2.0 alternate; blocks cdebconf transition
by Joey Hess 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

Assuming anyone ever sees this, you might want to fix your broken mailing list configuration. ----- Forwarded message from drupal-devel-owner(a)drupal.org ----- From: drupal-devel-owner(a)drupal.org Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 01:51:20 +0200 To: joey(a)kitenet.net Subject: Bug#331808: drupal depends on debconf without | debconf-2.0 alternate; blocks cdebconf transition You are not allowed to post to this mailing list, and your message has been automatically rejected. If you think that your messages are being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at drupal-devel-owner(a)drupal.org. From: Joey Hess <joey(a)kitenet.net> Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 23:41:26 +0000 (GMT) To: maintonly(a)bugs.debian.org Subject: Bug#331808: drupal depends on debconf without | debconf-2.0 alternate; blocks cdebconf transition Reply-To: Joey Hess <joey(a)kitenet.net>, 331808-maintonly(a)bugs.debian.org Package: drupal This package depends/pre-depends on debconf without allowing the dependency to be satisfied with an alternate of debconf-2.0. That is to say, its dependency should read: debconf | debconf-2.0 Until this is fixed, it is impossible to use this package with cdebconf, and very hard to impossible to install cdebconf at all. debconf-2.0 was added to policy as a virtual package in 2002 and has been provided by debconf since 2003. In early 2004, dh_installdebconf began automatically adding it as an alternate to debconf in dependencies it generates for packages using debhelper. So if you're using a current version of debhelper you should only need to rebuild your package and review it. If you are not using debhelper, make sure the dependency is modified to allow debconf-2.0 to satisfy it. This bug report was filed by semiautomated means after a trio of posts to the debian-devel mailing list, and you have probably also received a bcced mail about the issue before. If your package's dependencies are correct and it really has some valid reason to depend on debconf alone, please reassign this bug report to cdebconf with an explanation of what debconf feature your package depends on, so it can be reimplemented in cdebconf. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- see shy jo

1 0

[drupal-devel] blog != blog
by Bèr Kessels 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

Hey, Too often have i seen the questions in the forums, but this small usability test proves it: we need to do something about blog module. usability test: A consultant/developer I know set up a drupal site after I instroduced Drupal. I followed the process to see what would happen. Guess what? He used blog.module for his personal blog. And off course could not find anywhere to get rid of the breadcrumb Start >> Blogs >> Foos blog and of the links under each node 'Foos Blog'. I would really like to get this solved. It annoys me, for it makes Drupal look unprofessional to new users. Me: No, blog.module is not for blogs. It is meant for community blogs, when more people on one single site blog. He: So, then how must I blog? Me: Use stories. He: Then why do you not call blog module: communityblog.module and communicate better that it is not meant for the lonely blogger? I see you use the word journal. But I wanted to blog. Not write stories. Oh, yes, there, there is a note that stories can be used for personal blogs. Me: well, there are some notes here and there, but indeed, when there is a blog module, people will not look further. I guess that was the case. He: It was. ..... In any case: This is not really about patches, but about help texts and probably about what to ship in core. Or even about what to name blogs. I don't think adding config options in blog module are the solution. We have a very good solution: stories. IMO we must make it clear with Big Red Blinking Warnings that blog module is for community blogging. (or so) Please give your ideas on how to solve the ugly and unprofessional Blog != blog issue in core. Bèr.

2 2

Re: [drupal-devel] reviews needed
by Kobus Myburgh 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

> How about "Custom URL:" but before the text field for input, the base > URL is presented as a static text? This implies that what is to be input > is the bit after the base URL. I am not sure the current form API allows this, but it sounds good too. Regards, Kobus

3 2

Re: [drupal-devel] what do you call a rose?
by Kobus Myburgh 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

> The problem here is: Who is the user? Is it the admin of a site? Or is it > the user registering on a site. For that latter kind of user I do > agree with you, for admins I do not. You have a point, but what you have to remember is that not all admins are technical gurus like you :-) Sometimes the admin of a site is a newbie, or sometimes it is me. Haha. :-) Regards, Kobus

9 12

Re: [drupal-devel] reviews needed
by Kobus Myburgh 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

> "URL path" is a combination of both worlds, is accurate semantically, > and more importantly, accurate operationally: what the user types in is > exactly what the box is asking for (not a "custom URL", but a "URL > path", which "about" would be considered). I didn't follow the whole conversation all the time, but I believe Morbus is right. I was okay with custom URL, but Morbus' suggestion is better, IMO. Kobus

1 0

Re: [drupal-devel] reviews needed
by Kobus Myburgh 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

If you change path alias to custom url, it is best to make it URL and not url. Kobus >>> morbus(a)disobey.com 10/4/2005 2:18 PM >>> > 2. 'path alias' -> 'custom url' : http://drupal.org/node/30509 You already know my feelings here. Ignoring what URL actually means, it is an acronym and should be capitalized. Or is that "usability" too? -- Morbus Iff ( i've got the creme filling ) Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus

1 0

[drupal-devel] Taxonomy Access Module Takeover
by Pyroman[FO] 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

User keve has asked to take over the taxonomy_access module, since I don't have time to maintain it. Can an admin transfer it to him? Pyroman[FO]

1 0