Menu
▾
▴
cms-devel — The development mailing list
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
(67) |
Mar
(10) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-03-11 17:54:25
|
Ok, I added it to the TODO file and checked it back into CVS. William On 10 Mar 2002 at 9:29, Matti Lattu wrote: > Roger Buck wrote: > > > > For version 03.0 there is only one thing I feel "uncomfortable" with for > > the current UI.... When doing a chck-out, there are tow boxes in the > > drop-down menu: > > After getting IE to work with non-existent MIME I really don't know > wether we need the manual download at all. > > Viewing (and editing in TEXTAREA) text files is a good idea. The text > files could be indentified using file extension, but scanning the file > for non-text characters would be more elegant. This could be added to > 0.04-TODO? > > r. Matti > > _______________________________________________ > cms-devel mailing list > cms...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cms-devel > -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: Matti L. <mat...@he...> - 2002-03-10 07:31:28
|
Roger Buck wrote: > > For version 03.0 there is only one thing I feel "uncomfortable" with for > the current UI.... When doing a chck-out, there are tow boxes in the > drop-down menu: After getting IE to work with non-existent MIME I really don't know wether we need the manual download at all. Viewing (and editing in TEXTAREA) text files is a good idea. The text files could be indentified using file extension, but scanning the file for non-text characters would be more elegant. This could be added to 0.04-TODO? r. Matti |
|
From: Roger B. <ro...@sa...> - 2002-03-08 21:25:40
|
Matti Lattu wrote:
>
> William McKee wrote:
[--snip--]
> $desks->addDesk(
> name=>'desk1',
> path=>$contentroot."/desk1",
> pass=>"pass1",
> checkout=>1, turn checkout on in this desktop
> checkin=>1, turn checkin on in this desktop
> );
>
> If you don't specify these, they fall to default values,
> which are very restrictive (as you've noticed). I thought
> that restrictive default values are better than liberal ones,
[--snip--]
I think that is good - Just need to add a note about that in
cmsconfig.pm ;^)
I have done a fair bit of testing here and found everything to work very
well - I have tried lots of combination of desktop rights and all
behaved as expected so far.
For version 03.0 there is only one thing I feel "uncomfortable" with for
the current UI.... When doing a chck-out, there are tow boxes in the
drop-down menu:
If you intend to modify it If you do not intend to modify it
X Manual download X Manual download
reserved unreserved
I think this is confusing.
I think something like this would be more intuitive for user:
This file is available
If you intend to modify it:
[Enter reason here... ]
If your browser has problem with automatic download,
select maual download here: X
[Download]
See attached screen grab example.
Apart from that, great work ;^)
R. |
|
From: Matti L. <mat...@he...> - 2002-03-08 11:43:05
|
William McKee wrote:
> Now, I need some help. Although I can copy files via the file system into my
> desktops, I cannot see a way to upload new files to the desktops or, for that matter,
> to download the files I've manually copied. What am I doing wrong? I can send a
> screenshot if that would help.
You have to give checkin/checkout access to your desktop. In cmsconfig.pm, edit your desktop
configuration like this:
$desks->addDesk(
name=>'desk1',
path=>$contentroot."/desk1",
pass=>"pass1",
checkout=>1, turn checkout on in this desktop
checkin=>1, turn checkin on in this desktop
);
If you don't specify these, they fall to default values, which are very restrictive (as
you've noticed). I thought that restrictive default values are better than liberal ones, but
this can be changed easily (cmsdesktop.pm and look for "# Define very restrictive set of
defaults").
The best documentation about this particular matter is so far is in the cmsconfig.pm itself,
where the different fields and their values are listed.
> Matti's separate install docs should be merged into the main doc to
> present a single development effort.
I totally agree with you and I'm glad to see that someone is willing to do the job. I also
think that it is a good thing that someone else than the programmer is writing the
documents, as the programmers see the installation and administration processess from the
program's view which usually differs from the user's. In many cases the writer of the
document has given very valuable feedback for the developers, especially in the design of
the UI.
> I would be willing to take on that task. Also, Matti's install file mentions adding .cgi
> to the name of the upload script and correcting the $contenturl setting. However, the
> script I grabbed from CVS tonite already had .cgi and the $contenturl was setup that
> way as well.
The section "Setting upload cgi" in README.1st is outdated. Instead, see README.checkout and
comments in cmsconfig.pm.
r. Matti
|
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-03-08 03:16:17
|
Hi guys! I just installed CMS onto my WinNT4 server running Apache 1.3.22. The installation went very smoothly. I was up and running within twenty minutes. Excellent work everyone! Now, I need some help. Although I can copy files via the file system into my desktops, I cannot see a way to upload new files to the desktops or, for that matter, to download the files I've manually copied. What am I doing wrong? I can send a screenshot if that would help. Obviously I didn't get too far but here are my notes thus far: * <opinion>The install docs should be merged into a single file and grammatically corrected. The grammar isn't such a big deal as I could make out what Matti intended. However, it seems now that Alexandre and Matti are working together to release 0.03, Matti's separate install docs should be merged into the main doc to present a single development effort.</opinion> I would be willing to take on that task. Also, Matti's install file mentions adding .cgi to the name of the upload script and correcting the $contenturl setting. However, the script I grabbed from CVS tonite already had .cgi and the $contenturl was setup that way as well. I remember seeing some discussion about this issue but not knowing what was being hashed out don't recall the outcome. Should the install docs be updated to reflect the current cmsconfig.pm and filename or vice versa? * Most of the graphics I downloaded from the CVS server are mangled. Did whoever add those to CVS set the "-kb" option when adding the files? More later once I get my system functioning correctly. Thanks, William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-03-08 03:10:51
|
Alexandre, I just noticed that SourceForge has clipped the ending of the CMS project name. Perhaps removing document or file from the description will shorten it enough to fit. William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: Roger B. <ro...@sa...> - 2002-03-06 05:03:13
|
Matti Lattu wrote: > > Terve äijät! > > During the weekend I've implemented some new features to CMS. [--snip--] Looks good but no chance to give a good test until coming weekend. R. |
|
From: Alexandre G. <gr...@in...> - 2002-03-03 21:02:15
|
Great work ! I'll follow-up with a more thorough response later, but I can't wait to take a look at all this. Alexandre Gravel Infivia Solutions gr...@in... http://www.infivia.com //solutions internet //d=E9veloppement web //h=E9bergement = //consultation =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: cms...@li...=20 > [mailto:cms...@li...] On Behalf Of=20 > Matti Lattu > Sent: 3 mars, 2002 15:09 > To: cms-devel > Subject: [cms-devel] Some improvements >=20 >=20 > Terve =E4ij=E4t! >=20 > During the weekend I've implemented some new features to CMS.=20 > Each of can be configured separately to each desktop separately: > - leading dots to configuration files > - checkout, checkin and modify access (1) > - comments and notes (2) > - disk quota (3) >=20 > (1) The relation between different access types and=20 > user-level commands/functions must be documented somewhere. >=20 > (2) I decided to put similar parameters to these both,=20 > although all combinations (e.g. show only comment icon in=20 > directory view) are not all very useful. However, I liked the=20 > symmetry. >=20 > (3) Currently the GetUsedDisk in index.cgi counts also system=20 > files to desktop space. At the moment deleting files does not=20 > reduce used disk space, as CMS does not remove the files but=20 > renames them to *.delete. If you think quota from a security=20 > point of view counting the system files and deleted files to=20 > the used space is a good idea, but the users might get=20 > puzzled while they get keep getting "quota exceeded" messages=20 > no matter how many files they delete to gain free space. How=20 > do you feel about this? >=20 > After these I'm quote happy with the features in 0.03 so as=20 > far as I'm concerned we can start testing it. I've made some=20 > testing myself (the syntax seems to be ok :) but there must=20 > be tons of bugs out there. Hopefully you have time to play=20 > with the new version. >=20 > r. Matti >=20 > _______________________________________________ > cms-devel mailing list > cms...@li...=20 > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/c> ms-devel >=20 |
|
From: Matti L. <mat...@he...> - 2002-03-03 20:05:29
|
Terve =E4ij=E4t! During the weekend I've implemented some new features to CMS. Each of can be configured separately to each desktop separately: - leading dots to configuration files - checkout, checkin and modify access (1) - comments and notes (2) - disk quota (3) (1) The relation between different access types and user-level commands/functions must be documented somewhere. (2) I decided to put similar parameters to these both, although all combinations (e.g. show only comment icon in directory view) are not all very useful. However, I liked the symmetry. (3) Currently the GetUsedDisk in index.cgi counts also system files to desktop space. At the moment deleting files does not reduce used disk space, as CMS does not remove the files but renames them to *.delete. If you think quota from a security point of view counting the system files and deleted files to the used space is a good idea, but the users might get puzzled while they get keep getting "quota exceeded" messages no matter how many files they delete to gain free space. How do you feel about this? After these I'm quote happy with the features in 0.03 so as far as I'm concerned we can start testing it. I've made some testing myself (the syntax seems to be ok :) but there must be tons of bugs out there. Hopefully you have time to play with the new version. r. Matti |
|
From: Roger B. <ro...@sa...> - 2002-03-01 08:29:34
|
Apologies - This re-posted: Previously sent in error via personal mail to Alexandre: Alexandre Gravel wrote: > > Holà, > > > Anyway, what comes to the comments and notes, I'm always for > > increasing configuration options that allow admins to easily > > change the look of the program. We never know how people are > > using CMS, but the more freedom we give the better. But as > > you've been talking about templates in the 0.04, should the > > current options be enough for 0.03: > > > > dircomments display comments in directory view (0:no 1:yes) > > dirnotes display how many characters of the note in directory > > view (0:do not display) > > For now (0.03), I think those options should be enough. I agree. > I think that if > we can fix (or not) the checkout.cgi issue, we'll be able to do some > testing and then roll-out 0.03. I think we shoud also, if it ends up > being way too much code, skip the desktop specific settings as they'll > of course be in .04. This seems OK - I have only tested on Apache server. This may need a littel more clarification in docs. > > So here's what to do before .03 : > > - Figure out if it is worth it doing desktop specific settings Can get along without that at the moment. > - Fix (or not) the checkout.cgi script Seems to work OK as-is > - Implement Roger's patch on reducing index.cgi's size by 4k This has not been extensively tested and may introduce new problems (not that I've noticed any). Lets get 0.03 out of the way and put the effort into 0.04. My 2c R. |
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-02-28 15:56:50
|
> Perfect. I guess then that we'll be able to roll-out .03 next week after > some testing. We should also start thinking about the basic docs we need > to put out (README, INSTALL, CHANGELOG, TODO, etc). I'll start (or > anyone else also interested) to work on those in the next few days. I may not get to installing CMS this week but when I do, I will look over these documents and send my suggestions to the list. William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: Alexandre G. <gr...@in...> - 2002-02-28 15:05:54
|
Hi, > > - Figure out if it is worth it doing desktop specific settings > > It looks like I have some free time on Saturday. I'm quite > positive that at least the comment/notes can be implemented > quite easily. I have some local pressure for checkout/checkin > bits, but don't know yet if there will be more sweat to get > these work. Ok, great. > > - Fix (or not) the checkout.cgi script > > I think that this is already taken care of. Different web > servers need different setup. Currently I've tested CMS under > Apache, Boa (http://www.boa.org/), and IIS. Everything works, > as long as the configuration is done as suggested in README.checkout. Perfect. I guess then that we'll be able to roll-out .03 next week after some testing. We should also start thinking about the basic docs we need to put out (README, INSTALL, CHANGELOG, TODO, etc). I'll start (or anyone else also interested) to work on those in the next few days. Alexandre. |
|
From: Matti L. <mat...@he...> - 2002-02-28 14:34:29
|
Alexandre Gravel wrote: > - Figure out if it is worth it doing desktop specific settings It looks like I have some free time on Saturday. I'm quite positive that at least the comment/notes can be implemented quite easily. I have some local pressure for checkout/checkin bits, but don't know yet if there will be more sweat to get these work. > - Fix (or not) the checkout.cgi script I think that this is already taken care of. Different web servers need different setup. Currently I've tested CMS under Apache, Boa (http://www.boa.org/), and IIS. Everything works, as long as the configuration is done as suggested in README.checkout. r. Matti |
|
From: Alexandre G. <gr...@in...> - 2002-02-28 14:01:19
|
Hol=E0, > Anyway, what comes to the comments and notes, I'm always for=20 > increasing configuration options that allow admins to easily=20 > change the look of the program. We never know how people are=20 > using CMS, but the more freedom we give the better. But as=20 > you've been talking about templates in the 0.04, should the=20 > current options be enough for 0.03: >=20 > dircomments display comments in directory view (0:no 1:yes) > dirnotes display how many characters of the note in directory > view (0:do not display) For now (0.03), I think those options should be enough. I think that if we can fix (or not) the checkout.cgi issue, we'll be able to do some testing and then roll-out 0.03. I think we shoud also, if it ends up being way too much code, skip the desktop specific settings as they'll of course be in .04. So here's what to do before .03 : - Figure out if it is worth it doing desktop specific settings - Fix (or not) the checkout.cgi script - Implement Roger's patch on reducing index.cgi's size by 4k Alexandre. |
|
From: Matti L. <mat...@he...> - 2002-02-28 06:12:19
|
Roger Buck wrote: > > Hi Matti, that's the price you pay for having a non-coder on the > development list - If I knew I bit more, I could have understood that > better by reading the source ;^) No problem Roger! See, I [we] have always take account that people don't understand what I'm [we're] trying to say with my [our] English, while the native speakers are usually too polite to ask thinking that it might embarrass me [us]. [Select block-quotes for the general form] Anyway, what comes to the comments and notes, I'm always for increasing configuration options that allow admins to easily change the look of the program. We never know how people are using CMS, but the more freedom we give the better. But as you've been talking about templates in the 0.04, should the current options be enough for 0.03: dircomments display comments in directory view (0:no 1:yes) dirnotes display how many characters of the note in directory view (0:do not display) I've promised to implement these as desktop-specific. Haven't yet really looked how big modifications are needed for access privs. r. Matti |
|
From: Roger B. <ro...@sa...> - 2002-02-27 21:18:55
|
Hi Matti, that's the price you pay for having a non-coder on the development list - If I knew I bit more, I could have understood that better by reading the source ;^) Regards, R. Matti Lattu wrote: > > Roger Buck wrote: > > > Hi Matti - On my cms setup here, I find following: > > Let me quote myself: > > > I have not yet implemented > > read/write access etc. but the new module seems to provide the > > functionality that the old one did. [--snip--] |
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-02-27 15:33:07
|
On 27 Feb 2002 at 9:47, Alexandre Gravel wrote: > I agree. I put it like that so that people can get results if they > search either for document or file management. Ahh, that makes sense. How about including the file management in the description? William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: Alexandre G. <gr...@in...> - 2002-02-27 14:47:19
|
I agree. I put it like that so that people can get results if they search either for document or file management. Alexandre Gravel Infivia Solutions gr...@in... http://www.infivia.com //solutions internet //d=E9veloppement web //h=E9bergement = //consultation =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: William McKee [mailto:wi...@kn...]=20 > Sent: 27 f=E9vrier, 2002 09:29 > To: gr...@in...; cms...@li... > Subject: RE: [cms-devel] Releasing 0.3 >=20 >=20 > On 27 Feb 2002 at 9:17, Alexandre Gravel wrote: > > Thanks for the pointer, I've changed it to : > >=20 > > CMS - A web based document/file based management solution >=20 > You're welcome. I'm going to be a bit picky and suggest you=20 > remove the 'file based'. I don't think it gets across any additional=20 > information and muddies the simple definition of 'document=20 > management solution.' >=20 > William > --=20 > Lead Developer > Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database=20 > Integration http://www.knowmad.com > =20 >=20 |
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-02-27 14:29:25
|
On 27 Feb 2002 at 9:17, Alexandre Gravel wrote: > Thanks for the pointer, I've changed it to : > > CMS - A web based document/file based management solution You're welcome. I'm going to be a bit picky and suggest you remove the 'file based'. I don't think it gets across any additional information and muddies the simple definition of 'document management solution.' William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: Alexandre G. <gr...@in...> - 2002-02-27 14:17:27
|
Thanks for the pointer, I've changed it to : CMS - A web based document/file based management solution Alexandre Gravel Infivia Solutions gr...@in... http://www.infivia.com //solutions internet //d=E9veloppement web //h=E9bergement = //consultation =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: cms...@li...=20 > [mailto:cms...@li...] On Behalf Of=20 > William McKee > Sent: 27 f=E9vrier, 2002 08:35 > To: cms...@li... > Subject: [cms-devel] Releasing 0.3 >=20 >=20 > Alexandre, >=20 > Before you release 0.3, it might be helpful to update the project=20 > Descriptive Group Name (Admin:Edit Public Info from=20 > SourceForge). If you look at http://dbengine.sf.net, you'll see that=20 > the descriptive name is "dbengine - a WWW interface for=20 > databases". For CMS, it's just "CMS". If someone is searching for a=20 > document management solution, they may not realize what CMS=20 > does. >=20 > My $0.02, > William > --=20 > Lead Developer > Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database=20 > Integration http://www.knowmad.com > =20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > cms-devel mailing list > cms...@li...=20 > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/c> ms-devel >=20 |
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-02-27 13:34:25
|
Alexandre, Before you release 0.3, it might be helpful to update the project Descriptive Group Name (Admin:Edit Public Info from SourceForge). If you look at http://dbengine.sf.net, you'll see that the descriptive name is "dbengine - a WWW interface for databases". For CMS, it's just "CMS". If someone is searching for a document management solution, they may not realize what CMS does. My $0.02, William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: William M. <wi...@kn...> - 2002-02-27 13:21:01
|
On 27 Feb 2002 at 15:20, Roger Buck wrote: > Let's see what feedback we get from William and Matti on the last few > meassages and I'll see if I can find time do some testing on the current > cvs updates. The only feedback I have is that I agree with everything I've read. William -- Lead Developer Knowmad Services || Internet Applications & Database Integration http://www.knowmad.com |
|
From: Roger B. <ro...@sa...> - 2002-02-27 10:00:01
|
Hi Matti - On my cms setup here, I find following: When adding a comment to a file, the same comment appears in the fileview window for _all_ files that do not already have a note associated with them. Comment behaviour is OK. Also, are the access bits supposed to be working yet? ;^) I have played around with some changes here - but re-installed unmodified from CVS just to check but same results - the access bits do not seem to be working - the access rights do not seem to make any difference no matter whether set to 1 or 0. Maybe I am using incorrect syntax or expecting wrong behaviour? I have posted a copy of my cmsconfig.pm as "cmsconfig.txt" here: http://www.saas.nsw.edu.au/cgi-bin/cms/index.cgi using default CVS desktop names and pword If anyone is interested there are also updated patches for cmstools.pm and index.cgi - the changes are to clean up some of the html handling. The changes reduce index.cgi by around 4k Apologies for the lack of more detailed diagnostic inf - have run out of time for today. Please let me know if I can do more tomorrow. Regards, R. Matti Lattu wrote: > > Hi all! > > I've just committed a new version of cmsdesktop, while changes were made > also to cmsconfig.pm, index.cgi and checkout.cgi. > > The new module allows us to define multiple desktop-specific settings, > like checkout/checkin access, leading dots or not etc. The desktops are > defined one at a time at cmsconfig.pm, which seems to be more > admin-friendly than the previous design (or lack of it) used in the > initial version. In the scripts cmsdesktop is accessed through $desks > object. Some invalid-setup -type of checking is carried out while > storing the parameters. > > There are methods to read values of each property (path, access bytes > etc), see cmsdesktop.pm for more details. I have not yet implemented > read/write access etc. but the new module seems to provide the > functionality that the old one did. > > By the way, I defined three different access bits: > - access to check in files > - access to check out files > - access to modify things (rename, mremove, mkdir) > > Do you find this reasonable? I wanted to follow the CMS concepts > checkin/checkout instead of read/write which would have otherwise been > obvious. Of course, if one is able to check in files but does not have a > modify access, he/she might overwrite all existing files with zero-byte > files, just for a demonstration :) Does the separate modify access make > any sense to you? > > I've committed to implement desktop-specific settings for comments and > notes, but the stage is free for other improvements, etc. leading dots > in config files. > > r. Matti > > _______________________________________________ > cms-devel mailing list > cms...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cms-devel |
|
From: Roger B. <ro...@sa...> - 2002-02-27 04:20:09
|
Alexandre Gravel wrote: [--snip--] > This is my definite view on how the look of CMS will be driven as I am > well aware that the current way of doing things is pretty archaic. OK sounds great. Let's see what feedback we get from William and Matti on the last few meassages and I'll see if I can find time do some testing on the current cvs updates. R. |
|
From: Alexandre G. <gr...@in...> - 2002-02-27 04:11:46
|
> The purpose of "Comment" is to provide short, descriptive > text that should always be displayed to the viewer by default > in fileview. > > The purpose of "Notes" is for all the rest... which, in the > longer term, may even include images or... a separate .pdf > document or whatever? If that is correct, then it's better > that the body of "notes" _always_ appears as a link to be > opened in it's own window? I hadn't seen it like this (being able to attach other documents to a given file). I definitly agree with you on this. Should be a link everywhere. > One reason for that is, I think, that would also require > "rationalising" where the code for headers, td colors etc is > stored. Currently this looks like it's split between both > index.cgi and cmstools. This means you have to edit multiple > locations when making changes to page layout. This > particularly affects stuff like table tags etc. Better if > that could all be centralised for 0.04? In 0.04, there won't be any HTML code in both index.cgi and cmstools.pm. All html will be done from separate .html files (the templates themselves). We will be able to ship a couple themes with the CMS distribution that admins (or even users if we go far enough with the authentification and preferences) will be able to choose from or customize. This is my definite view on how the look of CMS will be driven as I am well aware that the current way of doing things is pretty archaic. A. |
