Page 17 of 134, showing 100 records out of 13,394 total, starting on record 1,601, ending on 1,700
| # | Username | Text | |
|---|---|---|---|
| # | 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 |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:47 | real34 | I'll try to set the bakery up in local and dig in the numerous branches to see what could I could do to help, but imo what is most needed atm are just specifications! |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:45 | savant | I should redump the db to be honest as the schema has changed and I haven't been diligent on making migrations, but there are only two developers working on it (myself and ProLoser) so it hasn't been a big deal |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:45 | savant | most of the github specific code is in a single model and it's controller |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:43 | savant | that hits github directly, but assuming I added codaset support, that would just mean making a switch or a helper to handle it |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:43 | real34 | ok |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:42 | savant | about the only thing github specific that would need refactoring is the news feed on each user/repository |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:42 | savant | i've been toying locally with hitting redmine for stuff |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:41 | savant | real34: not really. i have plans to allow it to access codaset once joel moss releases an api for it |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:41 | savant | i thought about making the account I have on github (cakephp-plugin-server) make pull requests to all developers on github with non-compliant cakephp app or plugin code |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:41 | real34 | savant, is there anything specific to github or could it be easily extended to any git repo? |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:40 | savant | next step is to serve them all up using git-svn and git-web |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:39 | savant | so now i have mirrors of every package I am indexing (about 577, give or take 10 that have been renamed or deleted) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:39 | savant | i've squashed a few bugs recently |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:39 | savant | linking to a repo is easy |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:39 | savant | gisting is easy |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:38 | savant | probably |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:38 | real34 | do you think the code you did for cakepackages could be easily reused for the github interaction (to link a code to a repository or a gist)? |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:37 | savant | to be honest I'm about to just throw out all of the existing bakery code and rewrite from scratch |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:36 | real34 | I'm just like you! |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:35 | savant | well, im more than happy to help with whatever is needed |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:35 | savant | hmmm |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:34 | real34 | not yet... still a matter of time afaik :) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:34 | savant | is that code open source yet? |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:34 | real34 | cakeqs was build with the idea of being multilingual and openid enabled, but it is just the beginning of a unique login |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:33 | savant | too many tools to be managed, and its too bad no one really has time to be dedicated to them, otherwise it would be kick ass |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:33 | real34 | I totally agree with that ;) and I think the CakePHP team and the CSF are aware of it. Imo it is just a matter of time for updating everything |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:32 | savant | oh and we can't forget live.cakephp.org, although it is usually forgotten for a few months |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:31 | savant | and then there is cakeforge, which is still hosting random things and being linked to by members (there is some good stuff there but it's getting sort of outdated) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:31 | savant | and cakeqs should really replace the google groups, but you'd need to import the archive (does cakeqs integrate with the other logins?) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:30 | savant | then there are the google groups, which get a modest amount of traffic, but usually the same questions |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:30 | savant | lighthouseapp is nice, but it requires yet another account on yet another service |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:29 | savant | the book is well built, but needs some work to make it apparent to all users that it is a wiki and they CAN contribute |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:29 | savant | the bakery is a smelly turd because people post their articles and the code isn't in a repository (git, svn or otherwise) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:28 | savant | you have bin, which is awesome, but not tied to my user account |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:28 | savant | to be blunt, there are way too many disparate tools in use for the cakephp community |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:28 | real34 | that "non tech" decision-makers could read to see how Cake is awesome :) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:27 | real34 | with all official announcements and community highlights |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:27 | real34 | a blog on news.cakephp.org for instance |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:27 | real34 | I initially thought about a simple setup of Croogo for another blog (simple / efficient), but the idea of having yet another tool is not optimal |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:26 | savant | communication? |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:25 | real34 | And btw, the reason why I think a bakery rewrite is needed is that 1) it would help to have one tool for all local communities / languages, 2) it would encourage share and reuse of code (but many changes are needed for this), 3) I think the CSF needs a better tool for communication, somewhat separated from the community generated content... and Predominant thinks the new Bakery could be this tool |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:24 | savant | so I kinda don't have any reason to keep working on this :P |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:24 | savant | and apparently Predominant added comment spam protection last week |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:24 | savant | I also needed to upgrade the app to 1.3, or at least 1.2, to get it to a point where i knew what I had to do to add comment spam (behaviors!) |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:23 | savant | so I would not get comment spam in my email |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:23 | savant | to be honest, the only reason I started working on this was to add spam protection |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:23 | savant | okay |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:23 | real34 | not sure if it is a good idea or not... but we can keep it in mind |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:23 | real34 | also, I think I may be able to get some help from french guys as soon as we will know what is needed and how we could proceed |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:22 | savant | I would have jumped into the version that alkemann was working on, but the changes were varied etc |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:22 | real34 | I'll start by forking the repo and making it work locally |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:21 | savant | Predominant mentioned some notes he would give me on the supposed rewrite |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:21 | real34 | ok |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:21 | savant | i've added some changes to the AppModel to make refactoring things into the model a bit easier, as well as added 1 behavior of my own to support extended model callbacks, but other than that my work has been to make it 1.3 compatible |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:20 | savant | like I said, all my work is based off of the original pre-1.0 code |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:20 | savant | idk |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:20 | savant | yeah |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:19 | real34 | it was fixed since though |
| # | Apr 26th 2010, 01:19 | real34 | __() was not used at all |