On Mar 16, 1:29 pm, The Editor <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/16/10, Markus <[email protected]> wrote: > > 1) I propose to build a library: a collection of code. > > > library > > library.forms > > library.searches > > We have talked about doing this several times. Just need to 1) decided > where to put it, and 2) do it. There are pro's and con's to putting it > in the docs, solutions, and your suggestion--some third location. We > actually already have the solutions.snippets section, but it is > experiencing absolutely no growth. I think having it in the docs would > be the best place. Thoughts?
Yes, thoughts. solutions.snippets is almost invisible. It's just something there in the docs. One link under many. Not even the page itself tells you that you are invited to share your code. But it's part of a more general issue. I would really love to do two things: 1) Take a copy of BoltWire.com and restructure it from scratch, make it dead simple to navigate and 100 % obvious where things are. Then post it to the list and see if it is good or terrible. 2) Go through every single system page of BoltWire and make the language as concise as possible. I could give you countless examples where the language is perfectly polite and coherent but too verbose. I bet that 90 % of all text, important or not, is only read by 1 % of the users. > Also, I wonder if we should generate a tagging system. It would be > really cool if we could scan each snippet, identify the key > functions/commands/conditions etc, and tag them that way, > automatically... > > > 2) I propose to create a built-in API. The current help system is for > > programmers. Users need something else: > > > search: > > * group: Limits search results to a group. > > * count: ... > > * link: ... > > Agreed. This was the idea behind the handbook section. All the pages > are setup. We just need people to fill in the documentation. My ideas > was, for each function page in the barn to have all the help > information at the top and then a button at the bottom for a > programmer that wanted to see the actual code. But this is definitely > going to take some time. Good idea. Then you could use the same help pages for the help system and for the entry page of a function in the docs. Easier to maintain and still the website would allow any additional or more elaborate help as subpages. > Looking at it now, it doesn't seem to even be working quite right. > I'll have to look at it. But probably we'll revisit the docs more > thoroughly after 4.xx as some things will change. > > > Config options . . . > > Thanks for sharing yours. I'll note them, for future reference... I > don't think mailAddress is used any more as it was replaced with > sitemail. Unless you are using an old plugin or something. Thanks. I'll remove it. > > > My plan is to support both, the Lite and Pro versions, as two separate > > > downloads. Possibly with a small fee for the extra Pro features, > > > perhaps on a suggested donation basis. Both Lite and Pro will run on > > > the exact same basic engine, and the Lite version will not be disabled > > > or weakened in any way, and it will remain, as always, free. > > > Now, I'm relieved. I was a bit worried when I heard Lite and Pro. Do > > yourself a favor and think again about the naming. Neither one is Lite > > and neither one is Pro. Isn't it more Pro if you program your site > > from scratch? Also Lite users will experience mental trauma and feel > > like second-class users. There is a high chance I would not even be > > writing this if I spotted the evil words Lite and Pro the first time I > > visited BoltWire.com. I always expect Lite versions to be "forgotten" > > sooner or later or to be designed to miss just the one feature you > > can't live without. > > Good points. And glad you are relieved. I intend to use the exact same > engine for both--with nothing hokey about the smaller version. I want > a strong user community because it makes the code stronger. And that > requires free, compelling software. And from the beginning, BoltWire > has been a ministry project, never a commercial one. If there is a > paid version it would only be to help defray some of the costs > involved (time mostly) for maintaining the extra feature set. > > > What about "BoltWire Scratch"/"BoltWire Core" and "BoltWire > > Box"/"BoltWire CMS". Just keep it neutral. > > I think just BoltWire and BoltWire CMS will work fine. Even better! > > * Limiting results? Please tell me and if there is a way to see more. > > in site.config, set: > > searchLimit: > > or if you want to just turn off the limit in certain situations, add > count=false as a search parameter. > > I think in the last release I changed the default from 25 to null like > above, to give full returns unless a count is specified. I'm not sure > which is a better default, but only getting partial returns was > confusing to me! Of course we don't want sites timing out from some > overly ambitious search criteria... null is great. You start with few pages and _if_ the site gets too big you can limit it as needed. Just stopping at 25 is arbitrary and confusing as you have said. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BoltWire" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/boltwire?hl=en.
