|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 10/7/2008
Posts: 505
Points: 1,515
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI_AW4Ts20YOver the weekend I made some changes to a copy of my Cuyahoga build. It is basically 2.0 (mostly) with the old 1.6 admin customised. This was as a test to find how it would perform. I actually like the way it worked out. I can cut and chop around large sections of a site very quickly. I have also added a rename action 'inline' using jQuery and ajax calls (not in the video). Cut, copy, paste, delete and move are all accessible via a new context menu. This calls the server side via jQuery Ajax calls to a new admin service I built (again just as a test). This works well and also allows the creation of an admin interface using other technologies other than HTML/JavaScript if one requires or prefers. The reason behind this was... why not try it and see. - jQuery context menu added to admin area. - jQuery Ajax - Admin web service (called by jQuery Ajax) - Sites and Nodes render in clean nested lists - Sites and Nodes utilise animated treeview display (state is stored in cookie). - Moduletools panels now appear toggled by a small icon. This does not alter the site layout any more - When moduletools panel is activated the relevant area is highlighted to show the user which area of content is associated with it I am looking at how some of this could be utilised in 2.0
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 10/7/2008
Posts: 505
Points: 1,515
|
Does anyone think this way of working would be worth while adding to a branch of the current 1.6?
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/3/2010
Posts: 11
Points: 33
|
Of course!  I'd love to see that available to everyone. Great work by the looks of it. I am also working with 1.6 because we decided that 2.0 is not far enough along for our needs. For now I added the possibility to translate the administrative part (resources - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms227427.aspx). I was also considering replacing NHibernate with the latest versions in that branch and adding Fluent NH. But I'm unsure if that's in the interest of the whole community.
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 12/30/2004
Posts: 1,674
Points: 1,824
Location: Wageningen (NL)
|
Guys, I'll try to setup a 1.6 branch on github for this stuff. This should make it easier to share and incorporate nice improvements like these.
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 10/7/2008
Posts: 505
Points: 1,515
|
Is there a build that is V2.0 core with the classic admin ?
If so then this would be a good staring place for me. I could then add a new web service based admin service and take it from there.
The idea would be to provide admin services that any UI could utilise (Flash/Flex, Silverlight, HTML/JS and even mobile apps).
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/12/2009
Posts: 23
Points: 69
|
@Constructor,
Wow, i really like your custom modifications!
Great work! I can't wait to get a copy.
Gr,
Mo
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2010
Posts: 1
Points: 3
Location: SLC, UT USA
|
Hello All,
Agreed. Anxiously awaiting branch of 1.6 for this new admin.
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 10/7/2008
Posts: 505
Points: 1,515
|
Ok, the issue is that the changes in the video are to my own 'non-standard' Cuyahoga build. It is still module compatible but has many other changes I have made. What I will do is take a copy of the current V1.6 and add the admin customisations to that. Ideally though, I would like to get V2.0 core in there also. If this is not possible then I will just stick to V1.6 as it is. I will add jQuery tabs to the admin forms. This will present the long forms in a tidy tabular format. So my question to everyone is: Is there a specific/best build number that I can get from the repository that has the classic admin still in there? Even if it is not 100% working it is a starting point. This version will be kept 100% compatible with the other Cuyahoga resources (modules etc). Just a little improved and 'remixed'
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/3/2010
Posts: 11
Points: 33
|
For me it would be quite important to stick with 1.6, because that is what we use at our company. We use the latest 1.6 source.
Also if these improvements are in everybody's interest (which I think they are) they should probably merged into the main 1.6 branch?
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 10/7/2008
Posts: 505
Points: 1,515
|
jernejl wrote:For me it would be quite important to stick with 1.6, because that is what we use at our company. We use the latest 1.6 source.
Also if these improvements are in everybody's interest (which I think they are) they should probably merged into the main 1.6 branch? The issue is for me that would mean double the work  I would rather improve a build that I could use also. My own build has many changes but the downloaded modules still work fine. A 2.0 core with an improved classic admin utilising ajax/web forms (that maintain state) and admin web services would nice. I will take a look and think.
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/3/2010
Posts: 11
Points: 33
|
Of course. You should be making improvements that you can use . If anybody else can that's an added bonus.
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 10/7/2008
Posts: 505
Points: 1,515
|
Continuing with the customisation process and testing etc, I found that the FCKEditor would not upload files in a site created on a subdomain.
The ASP.NET connector for FCK Editor uses a RegEx to clean the domain in its domain relaxation. Unfortunately this also cleaned the subdomain. I modified the connector and rebuilt it. It now works fine.
If anyone has had any issues with this I can provide the fixed version.
|
|
|
Guest |