|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 12/30/2004
Posts: 1,674
Points: 1,824
Location: Wageningen (NL)
|
I've compliled a list of new features and improvements for Cuyahoga 1.1. This is an unfiltered list with everything I had lying around for a while. There is no way that I can implement everything on my own, but I need to get a clear view of what is really needed.
Please leave some feedback or add more possible features or improvements.
Thanks in advance.
1. Content abstraction: create content base classes that take care of categorization, search, syndication, versioning. This should make modules more powerfull with less work. The base classes all will implement interfaces for the features, so it's possible to implement only a small part in your ow modules by implementing a specific interface and not using the base classes.
2. Rebuild administration interface.
3. Localization of the administration interface and module administration interfaces.
4. Module cleanup. Move Articles, StaticHtml, RemoteContent to its own projects. Also make html and css uniform for all modules. Add forum module to the package.
5. Database support for Oracle and Firebird.
6. Extended permissions for site administration. Allow adding pages for non-site administrators.
7. Full support for .NET 2.0. This can be accomplished once the new web application project model is final.
8. Better management for links and media in the content. Urls should not be hard coded.
9. Separation of users/templates between sites.
10. Customizable user attributes.
11. Customizable email templates.
12. Module repository on the Cuyahoga site.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/26/2005
Posts: 213
Points: 165
Location: Germany
|
Hi,
I think the first point you mentioned is the one that will add the most value to Cuyahoga.
Since you would like to concentrate on core developement, for modules there could be some sort of quality assurance, so other users can trust in the modules developed by the community.
As well, one could think about including a client scripting framework into Cuyahoga (see: MonoRails and script.aculo.us).
Thanks for all the great work!
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/6/2006
Posts: 12
Points: 0
|
Hi Martijn,
If I had the possibility to choose, here is, in my opinion, the 3 main priorities:
1- Possibility of "Editor Approval for new Content".
2- Full support for .NET 2.0
3- Rebuild administration interface.
4- Possibility of page administration in one different server (remote administration).
cheers
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/15/2005
Posts: 70
Points: 9
|
Hi Martijn I'd say I'd like to see: 1. Content abstraction: create content base classes that take care of categorization, search, syndication, versioning. This should make modules more powerfull with less work. The base classes all will implement interfaces for the features, so it's possible to implement only a small part in your ow modules by implementing a specific interface and not using the base classes. 2. Rebuild administration interface. 6. Extended permissions for site administration. Allow adding pages for non-site administrators. 7. Full support for .NET 2.0. This can be accomplished once the new web application project model is final. 9. Separation of users/templates between sites. I like the email template idea too and have just such a module, only thing is a canned FCK and used http://www.innovastudio.com/ and do not think the code could be easily put in to FCK  If you like the mock up of the admin interface I created for another project, let me know and I'll take on number 2, the treeview I am using is under GPL, am I correct in assuming this will not be an issue? Would you consider making this a pure .NET 2 project? Because there are quite a few things we could integrate, such as the sitemap, and for which I have a great little tool that converts the SiteMap in to a GoogleMap  Article Pagination would be a great feature too. Al
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/15/2005
Posts: 70
Points: 9
|
Oh Oh! And one more thing, should be quite easy. A error handler that handles exceptions, such as login failed more gracefuly (visualy)
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/2/2005
Posts: 18
Points: 3
Location: Australia
|
Martjin,
Here is your list prioritised in my world.
1. Content abstraction: create content base classes that take care of categorization,
2. Module cleanup. Move Articles, StaticHtml, RemoteContent to its own projects.
3. Full support for .NET 2.0.
4. Rebuild admin interface
5. Extended permissions for site administration.
6. Better management for links and media in the content.
7. Separation of users/templates between sites.
8. Customizable user attributes.
9. Customizable email templates.
---
The other options you mentioned probably won't be useful (to me) in the short term.
There are few other things I can think of but they are not for a .1 update.
---
Once my coding skills come up to par (ha!) I'd be happy to help where I can as well.
Jason.
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/22/2006
Posts: 2
Points: 0
|
My #1 and only requested feature is a stable version of Cuyahoga that has been tested to work out of the box with mono/pgsql.
I run a small (2 person) company that would like tto migrate quite a substantial project over to Cuyahoga. If we end up using Cuyahoga I think its quite possible we can contribute new code in the form of controls such as date pickers, etc...
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/24/2005
Posts: 13
Points: 0
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
|
Here is a list of features that I need in cuyahoga for use in my company as our portal. It's been in productions for months with a apache/mono/mysql configuration, and the only problems I've had were caused by myself. It's a very stable system and am very happy with it.
1. Editor Approval for new content. That way users can write their own articles, but the administrator has to approve them before they are visible.
2. Module for users to post files for outside users to pickup. (I know it's in the works by another cuyahoga user)
3. Module for posting thumbnails of pictures for users to download full picture or preview. (I know it's in the works by another cuyahoga user)
4. Module for forums that can run on mono and mysql. (I know it's in the works by another cuyahoga user)
5. Notification to administrator through email of any problems with the system. (bad queries, exceptions, etc)
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/4/2005
Posts: 43
Points: 0
|
Hi!
Here is your list ordered to show my priorities:
4. Module cleanup. Move Articles, StaticHtml, RemoteContent to its own projects. Also make html and css uniform for all modules. Add forum module to the package.
8. Better management for links and media in the content. Urls should not be hard coded. (there must be a clear link philosophy to link different sites and medias in one cuyahoga installation which are also automatically transfered if the site order changes)
12. Module repository on the Cuyahoga site.
cu
Thomas
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/23/2006
Posts: 1
Points: 0
|
1. Use .NET 2.0 memberprofile and user personalization functions
* Just for better integration with other MS products
2. Allow to use .NET 2.0 new servercontrols: sitemappath, Menu etc.
3. To use Visual Web developer 2005 Express Edition (as it is free) as a project model
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/15/2005
Posts: 70
Points: 9
|
wroxbox wrote:
3. To use Visual Web developer 2005 Express Edition (as it is free) as a project model
Sorry but I have to disagree with you here, Cuyahoga is a professional piece of software and thus should not be limited to a product used by non-professional developers. Now I know most developers do not want to have two instances of express (one web and one C#) to work on a site. There is nothing stopping cuyahoga working on the express, but don't hinder this great product, or the other professional developers out there. BTW, Visual Studio Express is free for one year only
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 12/30/2004
Posts: 1,674
Points: 1,824
Location: Wageningen (NL)
|
Great feedback guys! Thanks a lot! I'll compile a prioritized list of to-do items and see how many extra help we need. Now some remarks about individual points: mgaerber wrote:
As well, one could think about including a client scripting framework into Cuyahoga (see: MonoRails and script.aculo.us).
So we can say we have Ajax support? Certainly great for buzzword compatibility  . I'm not really that much into modern client side scripting so I have no idea what this would imply. big_al wrote:
If you like the mock up of the admin interface I created for another project, let me know and I'll take on number 2, the treeview I am using is under GPL, am I correct in assuming this will not be an issue?
Well in fact, this is an issue. Since Cuyahoga isn't GPL, it's not allowed to integrate GPL components without also releasing Cuyahoga as GPL. Besides that I was already hoping you would be in for number 2 and the screen you posted looked pretty slick . big_al wrote:
Would you consider making this a pure .NET 2 project? Because there are quite a few things we could integrate, such as the sitemap, and for which I have a great little tool that converts the SiteMap in to a GoogleMap wink
Not until the new web application project AND not before NHibernate natively supports .NET 2.0 features AND not before Mono runs the 2.0 stuff nicely. big_al wrote:
Article Pagination would be a great feature too
Is coming with an intermediate Articles module update before 1.1. randomhacker wrote:
My #1 and only requested feature is a stable version of Cuyahoga that has been tested to work out of the box with mono/pgsql.
It runs happily on my home server on Mono with pgsql. But: it is Mono 1.1.8.1 (before the web stuff rewrite). For later Mono versions issues have been reported. Waiting for the Mono guys to fix that. I'm not spending time at this anymore. wroxbox wrote:
1. Use .NET 2.0 memberprofile and user personalization functions
* Just for better integration with other MS products
Maybe we'll use the interfaces in the future. Not at this moment. Maybe if the authentication is pluggable, it's possible to also write a Cuyahoga authentication provider that uses the ASP.NET membership provider. wroxbox wrote:
2. Allow to use .NET 2.0 new servercontrols: sitemappath, Menu etc.
Not going to use the 2.0 stuff just because it is in the framework. It better has to have some real advantages. wroxbox wrote:
3. To use Visual Web developer 2005 Express Edition (as it is free) as a project model
This requires a complete restructuring of everything. I hardly doubt that this is going to happen. If you want it free, it's possible to use NAnt with your favourite text editor to develop for Cuyahoga.
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 12/30/2004
Posts: 1,674
Points: 1,824
Location: Wageningen (NL)
|
big_al wrote:
Sorry but I have to disagree with you here, Cuyahoga is a professional piece of software and thus should not be limited to a product used by non-professional developers.
Now I know most developers do not want to have two instances of express (one web and one C#) to work on a site.
There is nothing stopping cuyahoga working on the express, but don't hinder this great product, or the other professional developers out there.
In all honesty, I wouldn't really call Cuyahoga professional software . Personally, I'd love to see the possibility to develop Cuyahoga with the Express products because it lowers the barrier for beginners. It's just real unfortunate that the VWD express 'project' model differs so much from the existing stuff. It's just too much work reorganizing everything.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/16/2005
Posts: 63
Points: 156
Location: Italy
|
Cuyahoga PageEngine should allow editing on all Templates' Sections, i.e. for each section should load (with caching) custom html before/after adding templates. Marco http://blog.dotmark.net
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/26/2005
Posts: 213
Points: 165
Location: Germany
|
Hi, Martijn said: Quote:So we can say we have Ajax support? Certainly great for buzzword compatibility happy. I'm not really that much into modern client side scripting so I have no idea what this would imply. Actually not much work to do: add a script include (e.g. scriptaculous.js) statement to pages with modules that require client callback and add a generic interceptor for these callbacks which then invokes the requested server side methods and returns the result (string in, string out). More work would have to be done to provide specific helper functions, but that would lie more on the user's side, I think.
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 12/30/2004
Posts: 1,674
Points: 1,824
Location: Wageningen (NL)
|
mgaerber wrote:
Actually not much work to do:
add a script include (e.g. scriptaculous.js) statement to pages with modules that require client callback and add a generic interceptor for these callbacks which then invokes the requested server side methods and returns the result (string in, string out).
Ah, thanks for explaining. Btw, I checked out the scriptaculous libs and I think they would be great to use with the new admin interface. When doing the demos at their site, I could already imagine a few cool scenarios like moving nodes around and changing the order of sections.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/15/2005
Posts: 70
Points: 9
|
martijnb wrote:Great feedback guys! Thanks a lot! Well in fact, this is an issue. Since Cuyahoga isn't GPL, it's not allowed to integrate GPL components without also releasing Cuyahoga as GPL. Besides that I was already hoping you would be in for number 2 and the screen you posted looked pretty slick . Hmm, thats pretty $hitty This is an exceprt of the licence agreement, they offer 3 different licensing models, maybe one of the others may help us? Quote:| This software is available under the three different licenses mentioned | | below. To use this software you must chose, and qualify, for one of those. | | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | | The WebFX Non-Commercial License http://webfx.eae.net/license.html | | Permits anyone the right to use the software in a non-commercial context | | free of charge. | | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | | The WebFX Commercial license http://webfx.eae.net/commercial.html | | Permits the license holder the right to use the software in a commercial | | context. Such license must be specifically obtained, however it's valid for | | any number of implementations of the licensed software. | | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | | GPL - The GNU General Public License http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt | | Permits anyone the right to use and modify the software without limitations | | as long as proper credits are given and the original and modified source | | code are included. Requires that the final product, software derivate from | | the original source or any software utilizing a GPL component, such as | | this, is also licensed under the GPL license. | If you like where I'm going with the design I'd me more than happy to go ahead and implement it AL
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/26/2005
Posts: 213
Points: 165
Location: Germany
|
Hi big_al and martijn, as I see you are talking about javascript "widgets", if the license is an issue, you might want to have a look at: Dojo Toolkit : dojotoolkit.org Rico: openrico.org which offer even more out-of-the-box functionality... Just saw an example of a context menu: http://archive.dojotoolkit.org/nightly/tests/widget/test_Menu2.html
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/25/2006
Posts: 5
Points: 0
|
Martin,
I would love to help with anything that I am capable of helping with. I really appreciate the amount of work that you put into this, and doubly thank you for making it available.
Thanks,
Todd
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
, Member
Joined: 12/30/2004
Posts: 1,674
Points: 1,824
Location: Wageningen (NL)
|
big_al wrote:Hmm, thats pretty $hitty This is an exceprt of the licence agreement, they offer 3 different licensing models, maybe one of the others may help us? Unfortunately, also the non-commercial license is an issue since it prohibits usage in any commercial environment and I want that Cuyahoga can be used in any environment without restrictions. Quote:If you like where I'm going with the design I'd me more than happy to go ahead and implement it Great, but I'd really like to see design first, of how everything fits together in the new structure. Usability is proirity no. 1 here.
|
|
|
Guest |