to those maintainging the static page plugin

Ripper^^ · Post by **Ripper^^** » Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:58 am

Thank you for making the navagation links able to be turned off and on. You guys rock.

Ripper^^

Wizard · Post by **Wizard** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 2:52 am

Now if you can only make the editor link at the bottom be toggled on/off life would be sweet.

BTW, what is the difference between Draft/Publish for static pages?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 7:58 am

Yes that would be nice, I have to delete everything from the bottom there every time I update the plugin, but the edit link isn't half as annoying as the nav links were.

Ripper^^ · Post by **Ripper^^** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 8:00 am

Argh forgot to log in, that was me above.

Wizard · Post by **Wizard** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 7:44 pm

I noticed that the plugin upgrade dosen't like the publish-staus field. Viewing another post in this forum it appears that the plugin doesn't create the correct table/field in the database or insert the correct values for the field. Not sure which. I don't have direct access to my database (shared hosting) so it would be hard for me to access the database and create the correct field/values. Is an upgrade in order?

Andyman77 · Post by **Andyman77** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 10:18 pm

I have noticed that I can't even edit my static pages the 'tabs' at the top don't work, link to incorrect pages.

I have links like this
http://www.andyramblings.co.uk/%3C?=%20$serendipity['serendipityHTTPPath'].'
serendipity_admin.php?serendipity[adminModule]=event_display&serendipity[adminAction]=staticpages&
serendipity[staticpagecategory]=pageadd'%20?%3E
Which links to nowhere.

Sorry for the long URL.

Post by **garvinhicking** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:48 pm

Andy:

It seems your server doesn't support PHP shorttags. I've committed version 3.08 of the plugin which fixes this issue!

Regards,
Garvin

Andyman77 · Post by **Andyman77** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:14 am

Garvin,

Genius! perfect, Not too sure what PHP shorttags are, but yep that seems to have been the problem !

Thanks again

Wizard · Post by **Wizard** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 6:57 pm

Now if you can only make the editor link at the bottom be toggled on/off life would be sweet.

Any news of this request?

Post by **garvinhicking** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:54 pm

wizard, but you can already edit the plugin_staticpage.tpl file for that? I think adding a config switch for everything defeats the reasoning behind custom templates for staticpages...

Regards,
Garvin

Wizard · Post by **Wizard** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 9:55 pm

I realize I can edit the TPL file, but I don't want to have to remember to do this each time an update comes around. I just thought if you were able to add the config switch for disabling the navigation buttons, then a config switch for the editor would be just as easy.

falk · Post by **falk** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 1:16 pm

Wizard wrote:I realize I can edit the TPL file, but I don't want to have to remember to do this each time an update comes around. I just thought if you were able to add the config switch for disabling the navigation buttons, then a config switch for the editor would be just as easy.

Wizard, you can create your own templates and link it to your staticpages. If the templatename is deferent to the existing templatenames you don't have problems with updates. Why i program this features when nobody use it? Is it not easy enough or are some persons to lazy?

Post by **garvinhicking** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:36 pm

I think Wizard's reasoning is that he doesn'T want to modify any of our files - this way he benefits from new features in the default templates.

People who've once made a fork of a template code need to manually edit their template when new updates are introduced.

So templating seems to be more used for die-hard-customizers, but the ordinary people who only need CSS customizing seem to prefer configuring instead of templating...

Best regards,
Garvin

Wizard · Post by **Wizard** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:45 pm

Exactly! I should take offense at calling me lazy but I won't. Providing you don't mind me saying the same thing about coding configuration buttons.

Seriously though, I'm just looking at the big picture. One of the concerns that I read on other posts here is the fact that Serendipity is looked about as superior product but is lacking polish. This is one of the things that good coding solves. I understand the use of beta software but you don't want mainstream users having to be programmers just to make your software be usable. Configuration is good, customization is bad. In my business, (I am an implementer of very high end software for content management; FileNet, Documentum, etc..) the prevailing concern of all my clients is that they want sofware that can perform with minor or no customization. Editing asp pages, php files or code pages is not what sells products and makes it universally accepted. Configuration of software through the use of plugins and the like is what makes Serendipity a superior product, just look at the quantity and quality of what's available and growing. This must continue to allow s9y to grow to compete with the commerically available blogging software.

Or do you want s9y to remain a "geek" blogging software, great for coders, but not for the remaining 95% of the world.

I'll get of my soap box now.

Post by **garvinhicking** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:53 pm

Wizard,

I think you're raising a very good point here. In fact, Serendipity is trying to accomplish both ways: My personal goal as a PHP coder and blogger is, that I want to be able to push the blog into any direction I want. For this, I need plugin APIs, templating and customization means like those.

But on the other hand I want the simple people to benefit from existing plugins and to use s9y to the fullest extent.

My personal bottom line is to try to satisfy all people: I don't want Serendipity to become a 1-click-dummy-tool. But I also don't want Serendipity to be only usable by coders.

So I think in your case the most sensitive and common config options should be provided by developers, so I do think that if Falk or I find the time, the issue that raised this discussion will be made configurable

$0.02

Regards,
Garvin

to those maintainging the static page plugin

to those maintainging the static page plugin

Amen brother...

Erroring...