headers
Wichert Akkerman | 3 Apr 2007 12:30
Gravatar

NuPlone and Plone 3.0

I'm wearing my release manager hat today and was looking at NuPlone. At
the moment there are still a lot things that do not work or look bad in
NuPlone (IE support, form styling and control panel styling are easy to
find examples). That means that it is currently not in a state where I
want it to even ship with Plone 3.

So, what can we do about it? From what I gather:

- Cornelis does not have the time to work on NuPlone, but does not mind
  if others work on it. He does want to be consulted for any stylistic
  changes.

- Denis is willing to work on IE support for it

- Danny has a made a fair number of improvements on the Informaat
  NuPlone-based intranet design, which might be mergable into NuPlone
  directly. But he has no time to work on that.

This does not make me very optimistic for NuPlone's chances of staying
in. Unless something magic happens quickly I think we need to take it
out of the bundle and reconsider it for inclusion in Plone 3.5.

Wichert.

--

-- 
Wichert Akkerman <wichert@...>    It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/                   It is hard to make things simple.
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Wichert Akkerman | 3 Apr 2007 12:33
Gravatar

Re: PloneErrorReporting

Previously Alexander Limi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Could we please remove PloneErrorReporting from Plone 3.0?

It's gone now.

Wichert.

--

-- 
Wichert Akkerman <wichert@...>    It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/                   It is hard to make things simple.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Wichert Akkerman | 3 Apr 2007 12:45
Gravatar

Re: The big 3.0 ;)

some comments on this list, based on current status.

Previously Alexander Limi wrote:
> Fix before RCs:
> 
>     - KSS:
>         - Reduce file size, it's currently way too heavy

I'll make a seperate post on that.

>         - Get a basic UI on ÜberSelectionWidget

It has a basic UI, just no ajax interface. Nobody appears to be doing
that either, so we're going to have to postpone that until 3.5.

>     - Archetypes
>         - After we removed JS from checkboxes, they no longer "stick"
>           (really!). Might have to put that back, even though it sucks
>         - There's something strange going on with enabling comments, it
>           only works on the initial view of the page after saving,
>           possibly related

Fixed.

>     - NuPlone theme
>         - Be complete and functional by RCs, tested in IE6 too
>         - Be the default in RCs if the above is the case ;)

See my other post.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 18 comments |
headers
Alec Mitchell | 3 Apr 2007 17:30
Favicon

Re: The big 3.0 ;)

On 4/3/07, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@...> wrote:
> some comments on this list, based on current status.
...
> >         - Combine delete confirmation page with integrity checking
> >           (having to say yes/no on two separate pages sucks :)
>
> Needs to happen soon or becomes 3.5 material.

I'm pretty sure you can't do this while maintaining post protection
for the delete action without adding some tremendous hack to delay the
deletion until a second post request, or by making the original delete
link a POST form submit.  Neither of these is really 3.0 material IMO.

Alec
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alec Mitchell | 3 Apr 2007 17:41
Favicon

Re: NuPlone and Plone 3.0

Franco Carinato, and to a lesser extent Rosario Di Somma, looked at it
a bit during the sprint.  I'm not sure how feasible it would be for
them to help get it into a usable state in the near future though.  We
really missed spliter at the sprint.

Alec

On 4/3/07, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@...> wrote:
> I'm wearing my release manager hat today and was looking at NuPlone. At
> the moment there are still a lot things that do not work or look bad in
> NuPlone (IE support, form styling and control panel styling are easy to
> find examples). That means that it is currently not in a state where I
> want it to even ship with Plone 3.
>
> So, what can we do about it? From what I gather:
>
> - Cornelis does not have the time to work on NuPlone, but does not mind
>  if others work on it. He does want to be consulted for any stylistic
>  changes.
>
> - Denis is willing to work on IE support for it
>
> - Danny has a made a fair number of improvements on the Informaat
>  NuPlone-based intranet design, which might be mergable into NuPlone
>  directly. But he has no time to work on that.
>
> This does not make me very optimistic for NuPlone's chances of staying
> in. Unless something magic happens quickly I think we need to take it
> out of the bundle and reconsider it for inclusion in Plone 3.5.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Martin Aspeli | 3 Apr 2007 20:21
Picon
Gravatar

Re: The big 3.0 ;)

Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> some comments on this list, based on current status.
> 
> Previously Alexander Limi wrote:
>> Fix before RCs:
>>
>>     - KSS:
>>         - Reduce file size, it's currently way too heavy
> 
> I'll make a seperate post on that.
> 
>>         - Get a basic UI on ÜberSelectionWidget
> 
> It has a basic UI, just no ajax interface. Nobody appears to be doing
> that either, so we're going to have to postpone that until 3.5.

It really needs to be made to look a bit less amateurish (no offense!) 
though, even if it's just HTML. :)

>>     - Wicked
>>         - Needs to use createObject?type_name=Document — the way it is
>>           set up now, anything spidering the site with credentials will
>>           create objects, and any object clicked will create objects
>>           (this change will make it invoke portal_factory)
> 
> Hasn't happened.

Am I right in thinking this should be considered a seriousish bug?

>>         - Don't install the following by default:
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Alec Mitchell | 3 Apr 2007 20:35
Favicon

Re: Re: The big 3.0 ;)

On 4/3/07, Martin Aspeli <optilude@...> wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> >>     - Wicked
> >>         - Needs to use createObject?type_name=Document — the way it is
> >>           set up now, anything spidering the site with credentials will
> >>           create objects, and any object clicked will create objects
> >>           (this change will make it invoke portal_factory)
> >
> > Hasn't happened.
>
> Am I right in thinking this should be considered a seriousish bug?

I don't see why this should be considered any better/worse than the
content add menu which uses the exact same links and will be shown on
all such pages as well.  From a spiders point of view, it's not
different, AFAIK.  Not that this isn't an important issue, but we've
lived with it for a long time.

Alec
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Florian Schulze | 3 Apr 2007 20:40
Picon
Gravatar

Re: The big 3.0 ;)

On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 20:21:06 +0200, Martin Aspeli  
<optilude@...> wrote:

> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>>         - Move sendto/print/whatever to bottom of page, use text
>>>           representation
>>  Needs to happen soon or becomes 3.5 material.
>
> Bear in mind this probably has an impact on third party products' view  
> templates if they need to change to be consistent with the "new"  
> standard.

That's why we switched to viewlets. 3rd party products need to adapt  
anyway now. The change itself is then transparetn to 3rd party products.

Regards,
Florian Schulze
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Martin Aspeli | 3 Apr 2007 21:11
Picon
Gravatar

Re: The big 3.0 ;)

Alec Mitchell wrote:
> On 4/3/07, Martin Aspeli <optilude@...> wrote:
>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>>>     - Wicked
>>>>         - Needs to use createObject?type_name=Document — the way it is
>>>>           set up now, anything spidering the site with credentials will
>>>>           create objects, and any object clicked will create objects
>>>>           (this change will make it invoke portal_factory)
>>> Hasn't happened.
>> Am I right in thinking this should be considered a seriousish bug?
> 
> I don't see why this should be considered any better/worse than the
> content add menu which uses the exact same links and will be shown on
> all such pages as well.  From a spiders point of view, it's not
> different, AFAIK.  Not that this isn't an important issue, but we've
> lived with it for a long time.

True. So what's it using now? In any case, if it's not using 
createObject it probably should (if feasible) just to standardise on 
that API.

Note that the add menu can make use of z3 add views now. I don't think 
there's an immediate need for wicked to do the same, but if it uses 
createObject, then we could make createObject support addviews as well 
in the future, again through a common interface.

Martin
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
whit | 3 Apr 2007 21:47
Picon

Re: Re: The big 3.0 ;)

Alec Mitchell wrote:
> On 4/3/07, Martin Aspeli <optilude@...> wrote:
>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>> >>     - Wicked
>> >>         - Needs to use createObject?type_name=Document — the way 
>> it is
>> >>           set up now, anything spidering the site with credentials 
>> will
>> >>           create objects, and any object clicked will create objects
>> >>           (this change will make it invoke portal_factory)
>> >
>> > Hasn't happened.
>>
>> Am I right in thinking this should be considered a seriousish bug?
>
> I don't see why this should be considered any better/worse than the
> content add menu which uses the exact same links and will be shown on
> all such pages as well.  From a spiders point of view, it's not
> different, AFAIK.  Not that this isn't an important issue, but we've
> lived with it for a long time.
who spiders with credentials? The real issue is clicky users creating 
content they don't actually edit.  This is more of an annoyance than a 
barn-burner considering it's a wiki convention that most of the time 
people use the syntax so they can rapidly create and populate a link.

this is like 3-4 line fix unless you wanted to create a proper add view 
(ie less effort than has been expended in writing emails about it).  
might have time this weekend to do it.

an kss inline of the add item page would be by far the best solution
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane