| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:10 |
nurvzy |
Alright, well assuming we overlook the spelling/grammar issues and condesending tone, the article content seems OK. Thoughts? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:09 |
ADmad |
leave him some feedback and see if you can get him to improve on it |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:07 |
nurvzy |
Ah, I see your point. |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:07 |
nurvzy |
Indeed, personally, if the poster doesn't have the respect for the article to read through it once/twice before submitting it shouldn't be published (ie feedback given). |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:07 |
ADmad |
english might not be the first langauge of that person and since bakery isnt internationalized yet we leave him no choice but to submit in english |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:06 |
ADmad |
hmm thats kind of a grey area i would say :) |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:06 |
nurvzy |
(other than code presentation) |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:05 |
nurvzy |
Or do we just focus on content, regardless of presentation? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:05 |
nurvzy |
There are many gramatical and spelling errors througout the entire article. Is that a relavant feedback to give and hold publication? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 17:04 |
ADmad |
. |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 16:59 |
nurvzy |
Hi, anyone around? I have a moderation question regarding the pending article http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/better-use-of-the-observefield-method . |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:56 |
nurvzy |
Yuck, I hate seeing apps like that. One of my clients handed me an app and said "fix it" the previous coder had no idea what he was doing. mysql functions all over the place, mainly in the views. Why even use a framework if you're going to do that?! |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:55 |
ADmad |
yup |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:55 |
nurvzy |
Ok, thanks. I'm currently looking at http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/image-resize-and-crop-on-the-fly and am formatting the Author PM to include suggestions for HTML helper as the crop function does not return a valid img tag. Would you agree? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:54 |
ADmad |
and just take care that the code is of decent quality. for instance a while back a wordpress helper was published which was absolute crap. fetching data from tables using mysql_* functions. shouldn't even bother giving a response on such stuff imo. |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:53 |
ADmad |
nah no such priority, i would just give priority to the ones which need least changes to get published :) |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:52 |
nurvzy |
oldest* too :) |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:52 |
nurvzy |
Will do. As a newbie mod, Is there anything I should know that isn't documented? I've read through the guidelines as well as coding standards in trac. For instance, is there a priority order for the queue? oldets->newest? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:47 |
ADmad |
a msg would be nice |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:44 |
nurvzy |
Indeed. Should I PM the author about the issues before removal or should I remove? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:43 |
ADmad |
that one looks like crap anyway. If people expect their articles to be published they should alteast properly format them |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:42 |
nurvzy |
For instance, I'm looking at http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/wikkacake-using-cakephp-as-an-embedded-framework. I personally agree with ADmad about removal, but I certainly don't want to step on anyone's toes. |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:39 |
ADmad |
i think those are lying long enough to be not missed by anybody, so just dump them imo :) |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:38 |
nurvzy |
Wow, some pending queue submittions are written for 1.1. What is the policy about articles written for CakePHP 1.1 (and now possibly 1.2, since release of 1.3)? Do we not care about what version the article was written for? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:35 |
PhpNut |
hi |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:34 |
jose_zap |
hi |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 11:33 |
nurvzy |
hi |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:54 |
savant |
it sucks |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:54 |
savant |
okay I give up on the bakery |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:53 |
ADmad |
yes you can :) |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:52 |
savant |
haha |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:52 |
savant |
pretty please? |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:52 |
savant |
can I throw out everything I currently have |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:51 |
ADmad |
real34: savant: here you can find the few specs for propsed bakery 2.0 http://thechaw.com/bakery/wiki but it never got underway.. you can use it at a starting point though |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:51 |
real34 |
it was nice to chat and see that the bakery rewrite is on its way :)] |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:51 |
savant |
alright |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:50 |
real34 |
I have to focus on getting work done for now, but I'll be around and will read logs anyway! |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:49 |
savant |
haha |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:49 |
real34 |
ACTION don't like the current bakery frontend |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:48 |
savant |
im all for just throwing out the current bakery and making something that looks like the current bakery for the frontend users and something that looks prettier in the backend |
| # |
Apr 26th 2010, 01:47 |
real34 |
as soon as we'll know what is needed, implementing it will be fast and we could have more people involved with it |