cotonti.com : Updated PFS system

medar

Di, 05 Jul 2011 17:19:24 -0000

Also there is http://imperavi.com/ , most nice-looking wysiwyg editor in the world.

Trustmaster

Di, 05 Jul 2011 11:50:15 -0000

Honestly I would prefer switching to elRTE, it doesn't have these clipboard issues CKEditor has.

Kort

Di, 05 Jul 2011 08:13:32 -0000

My limited experience with CKEditor makes me think that this is definitely not the best editor to use. From the user / content manager viewpoint it is a nightmare. Simple task of paragraph formatting for plain text imported via clipboard takes too much time and requires occasional switching to the html-mode to remove autogenerated paragraph containers. Basically, Markitup is far more superior with regard to the output code readability and overall usability, unless we find a better CKEditor alternative.

medar

Di, 05 Jul 2011 08:00:31 -0000

May be using elfinder as new PFS ? http://elrte.org/elfinder/ Elfinder may work with CKEditor.

Trustmaster

Mo, 26 Okt 2009 06:04:06 -0000

We need to use abstract JS functions in PFS or just provide buttons with class/attributes, so that exact editor (whichever) could hook into them and provide the action.

Alex300

Mo, 26 Okt 2009 02:33:41 -0000

I read, that in Siena 0.7.0 improvement PFS is planned.
Probably it is necessary to make, that the new PFS system could operate with Markitup, and with CKEditor?

It will allow:
- To remove from CKEditor plug-in the built in PFS system.
- Developer of the plug-in is not need any more to update CKEditor built in PFS system every time the core PFS system updated.
- Cotonti users, who uses page HTML-parsing is not need to reinstall updated CKEditor plugin every time the PFS system updated.

P.S. Inserting hyperlink procedure in ckeditor window is very simple. Depending of the loaded editor we can call link insert function for Markitup or CKEditor.

Kilandor

Di, 06 Okt 2009 16:39:28 -0000

If you want/need it now you can use the trunk, but its not recommended for live sites to use

donP

Mo, 05 Okt 2009 05:33:47 -0000

Can't wait anymore... it would be nice a beta now...

pieter

Mo, 05 Okt 2009 02:45:34 -0000

is planned for 0.7.0

donP

Mo, 05 Okt 2009 02:36:42 -0000

Any news?
We all really need a real good PFS for Cotonti...

Kilandor

Fr, 14 Aug 2009 11:10:52 -0000

I'm going to be looking into it and fixing it up more don't worry esc

GHengeveld

Fr, 14 Aug 2009 04:26:08 -0000

image.php will likely be moved elsewhere, I've discussed this with Kilandor.
The lib folder is something that was discussed and agreed upon here.
Flash uploader needs fixing, actually it might be replaced with swfupload. I was hoping some other developer would handle this task.

esclkm

Fr, 14 Aug 2009 01:24:15 -0000

- why we need new file in root "image.php"
- what the new directory lib - I miss understand including it.
- flash upload - only uploads files but not add them in DB
- may be we have JAVA scripts for upload files?
- flash upload - skin - brrrr....(((
- Max upload files in pfs may be place it in admin area? not in config?
-I think main folder name as main folder (not root)?

Lissbol

Di, 28 Jul 2009 17:44:40 -0000

Sounds like a killer m8 cant wait to see it when youre done with all the coding.

esclkm

Di, 28 Jul 2009 06:05:27 -0000

I want to see it)))

GHengeveld

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 20:37:59 -0000

Thanks, I'll need it. This is really a tough nut to crack, as there's so much to take into account and it gets ever more complex.

tensh

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 19:54:08 -0000

Sounds really great I wish you happy and bug-free coding

GHengeveld

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 19:22:38 -0000

It's not that interesting to see yet. I've kept the looks of it mostly the same. Here's what I've done so far:
- Infinite subfolders
- Physical folders
- Prep for flash uploader (using Uploadify now, SWFupload gave some issues)
- Added configuration option for enabling/disabling flash uploader and added 'Dynamic' thumbnail generation option
- Gave each PFS file its own template file (pfs.tpl, pfs.editfolder,tpl, pfs.edit.tpl, pfs.view.tpl)
- Main pfs now fully skinnable (other parts will be done soon)
- Added tag for the current path (to display "PFS / Parentfolder / Currentfolder" - each clickable)
- Now shows 'new folder' also inside a subfolder (and sets 'parent folder' option to the current folder)

TODO:
- Moving and copying of files/folders
- Drag&drop files/folders
- Fix flash uploader to write to database (now only uploads the file, doesn't add db entry)
- Incorporate SLIR in a way that it is backwards compatible with old thumbs system
- Add directory tree view
- Allow file sharing between users

tensh

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 19:02:24 -0000

Ye, I guess it's a suprise

Trustmaster

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 18:44:14 -0000

He-he, he wanted a screenshot/demo, I suppose :-)

GHengeveld

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 18:22:19 -0000

It's not a question, tensh wanted a preview.

Trustmaster

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 15:15:24 -0000

What is the question about?

GHengeveld

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 05:51:32 -0000

What about this.. it's a piece from pfs.tpl



	{PHP.L.Delete}
	{PHP.L.Edit}
	{PHP.L.Folder}/{PHP.L.Gallery}
	{PHP.L.Files}
	{PHP.L.Size}
	{PHP.L.Updated}
	{PHP.L.Public}
	{PHP.L.Description}



	[x]
	{PHP.L.Edit}
	{PFF_ROW_ICON}
	{PFF_ROW_TITLE}
	{PFF_ROW_FCOUNT}
	{PFF_ROW_FSIZE}
	{PFF_ROW_UPDATED}
	{PFF_ROW_ISPUBLIC}
	{PFF_ROW_DESC}

tensh

Mo, 27 Jul 2009 05:47:58 -0000

Wanna see, wanna see!!! At least screenshots for the heat-up

GHengeveld

Sa, 20 Jun 2009 00:21:23 -0000

The new PFS will probably ship with a script to update from an older version, so you shouldn't worry about that. Also, you can set in admin panel if you want to use the new features or not.

I doubt that the new PFS will make the medialibrary obsolete, because the two have different uses. PFS is mostly just a file manager, and thus doesn't incorporate a gallery.

Added 37 days later:

I've been working on the new PFS all day today. I've incorporated the bugfixes that are in Genoa. The PFS is now almost fully skinnable too.

tensh

Do, 18 Jun 2009 14:16:08 -0000

Hmm, don't be offended by my piece of opinion, I'm pretty used to PFS system. Also, users on my site have tons of pictures in old Seditio PFS.

Elgan

Do, 18 Jun 2009 08:16:56 -0000

makes u happy? lol cheers

Lombi

Do, 18 Jun 2009 07:12:34 -0000

# Elgan : well we will see with the new PFS if it makes medialibrary obsolete.

Elgan

Do, 18 Jun 2009 03:01:08 -0000

ah i see.

well we will see with the new PFS if it makes medialibrary obsolete.

Lombi

Do, 18 Jun 2009 02:22:16 -0000

Well what I meant is a replacement for pfs.php which basically replaces the need for the built-in PFS.

Elgan

Do, 18 Jun 2009 02:12:54 -0000

i actually managed to steal images uploaded in PFS and add them to medialibrary without a core edit.

However im duplicating them atm as i didnt want to start adding placement holders to medialibrary, for example an extra sql to say if its from PFS and then look in more folders. An alternative is to make medialibrary use all the cotonti folders. Which i deliberate didn't do. As i wanted the files separate because its a separate plugin. Giving he option on the medlib config to change the folder path.

Lombi

Do, 18 Jun 2009 02:03:44 -0000

Right, as Elgan said. Hacking a PFS that's compatible with medialibrary and ignores the old PFS is simple as heck to do.

Elgan

Do, 18 Jun 2009 01:45:30 -0000

# tensh : I'm also very curious about this.

Though the Media Gallery plugin independent from PFS sounds tempting at first, PFS is IMO better, because users can re-use their files around the site. I'm looking forward to a better Media Gallery based on PFS.

thanx.lol

and if u mean medialibrary then u can use the images etc from medialibary in forums and pages, just create a bbcode, i did before, for the old medlibrary. i can post more details in the future.

also been considering hijacking the PFS for integration but i waited and am waiting for the new PFS.

SunChase

Mi, 17 Jun 2009 22:06:30 -0000

I think that the PFS system in general needs the change.The current pfs isn't comfortable to use.
The the features sound good.I would like to add one minor thing about the folders:

Could you add group actions to the folder like "Select a few or all" and do the general actions on them,like delete,move,insert as file,instert as thumbnail,insert as object and ect.

and one minor thing about the File Uploading.When i upload a file and it sais "That the file with this name wasn't uploaded cause its already there" could there be typed WHERE is it....

Thanks for attention

tensh

Mi, 17 Jun 2009 19:02:41 -0000

I'm also very curious about this.

Though the Media Gallery plugin independent from PFS sounds tempting at first, PFS is IMO better, because users can re-use their files around the site. I'm looking forward to a better Media Gallery based on PFS.

pieter

Mi, 17 Jun 2009 13:29:05 -0000

Koradhil,

Is there allready a demo available, to view this nice new PFS?
A Demosite?

GHengeveld

Di, 02 Jun 2009 19:45:12 -0000

Difference between Uploadify and SWFUpload is indeed only minimal. I'm experimenting with both, but so far my preference goes to Uploadify. In the end I might still opt for SWFUpload though.
Also the current upload method will still be available if you don't want to use the advanced uploader or javascript or flash is not supported.

UPDATE

I'm considering integrating SLIR with the new PFS system. It's greatest advantage is that it enables you to use different size thumbnails for any occasion, without creating too much server load or depending on the user's system to dynamically resize the image.

Main features:

Resizes JPEGs, GIFs, and PNGs
Intelligently sharpens for crisp photos at any size
Can crop based on width:height ratios
Can color-fill transparent GIFs and PNGs (to prevent IE6 issues)
Built-in caching keeps image variations for optimal performance

Basically what it does is:

You use a dynamic thumbnail url like datas/thumbs/filename.jpg?width=200&height=150
SLIR will check to see if there's already a file with these specifications
If not it will create the thumbnail using GD and return the new thumbnail
If so it will just return the existing thumbnail

Lombi

So, 31 Mai 2009 04:00:25 -0000

Right. They have operated the same for a couple of years now. If your not using ASP then you have some sort of flash progress-bar multi-file upload thing.

Elgan

So, 31 Mai 2009 01:49:30 -0000

# Koradhil : Main reason for choosing Uploadify is because it uploads multiple files at once, instead of one by one.

right? They all work exactly the same. by flash fire refrance. it's all one by one. uploadify is the same. It uploads a file and your php script handles it. Then it goes to the next one. THe flash provides the multi select files dialog. Otherwise there would be no need for flash. Then flash uploads with its referancwe controlled via javascript.

They all upload one by one...you just make total or file by file progress bar or both.

GHengeveld

Sa, 30 Mai 2009 23:36:45 -0000

Main reason for choosing Uploadify is because it uploads multiple files at once, instead of one by one.

{PHP.L.Delete}	{PHP.L.Edit}	{PHP.L.Folder}/{PHP.L.Gallery}		{PHP.L.Files}	{PHP.L.Size}	{PHP.L.Updated}	{PHP.L.Public}	{PHP.L.Description}
[x]	{PHP.L.Edit}	{PFF_ROW_ICON}	{PFF_ROW_TITLE}	{PFF_ROW_FCOUNT}	{PFF_ROW_FSIZE}	{PFF_ROW_UPDATED}	{PFF_ROW_ISPUBLIC}	{PFF_ROW_DESC}