|
Nah, I mean databases let me do things like version control, albeit through a different approach, and the performance is way better from a database depending on what you're doing. I mean if you're just generating a bunch of pages that will never change, like for a blog, sure, static makes lots of sense. But once you start developing something with more fiddly requirements and functionality it collapses under its own weight.
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
YO MAMA HEAD posted:Went to a Jekyll session at connect-tech last week and the presenter mentioned https://staticsitegenerators.net/. There are literally hundreds of these I don't have anything against static site generators, but it's the marketing-speak that makes my eyes roll back into my skull. Space Kablooey fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Oct 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
kedo posted:Drupal is a crate dropped off a truck from Paintbrush Supplier Inc. that contains uncut wood, metal banding, rivets and a 100lb bag of mixed horse hair. The supplier also sent his extremely autistic son along to explain how to combine those elements into paintbrushes, but his son spends most of his time ignoring you and debating hair texture with himself off in a corner. Ultimately, with a lot of effort you can probably make exactly the type of paintbrush you need for the job, but it's a massive time sink considering you didn't set out to make a paintbrush in the first place, you're just trying to paint your garden shed blue for the missus. This is surprisingly accurate though I disagree with the last bit. In fact there are times with any pre-built system such as Embraco, Tritium, Drupal, Wordpress, etc... that you're getting paintbrushes and you really want that unique paintbrush because client said so and won't loving budge. On the other hand working on a team doing a JS front end with C# backend I'm amazed at how lucky I am when using any CMS. Things that I don't really have to think about - forms, routing, restful web services are all semi-major tasks and heap onto the custom code base. What I like about Drupal specifically is that it lets me focus on some heavier development for when I need it and I can get an awesome blue garden shed in less time. What I dislike about Drupal is that it feels like I'm the only one who knows what the gently caress they're doing, and that leads to quite a few terrible experiences with it. Oh, that and composer support is weird, but I checked out Laravel recently and it's pretty weird in that regard too. Of course I can blame myself for some things because I have quite a few core commits. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
fuf posted:I have quite a lot of Wordpress experience and from my point of view Wordpress sites are still pretty awful I use https://getgrav.org/ in prod and like it
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
YO MAMA HEAD posted:Went to a Jekyll session at connect-tech last week and the presenter mentioned https://staticsitegenerators.net/. There are literally hundreds of these
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:I don't understand what niche these really fill, and I say that as someone whose website stuff is almost entirely done in relation to a website running from a flat-file CMS that I wrote. They're not really meant to fill anything. A basic cms is just not that hard to write, so lots of people have written and open sourced them... not much more to it than that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
Just found an article that discusses similar points that were just brought up if anyone's interested.quote:If you're a WordPress developer, Drupal is a bloated, complicated, confusing, obtuse monster of a platform, and you don't even know where to start -- where is the HTML that I can just edit?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
The reason that that quote is accurate is that both are terrible and generally people don't see the terribleness if they're used to it. Most codebases approach terribleness as they get older if they don't have a strictly enforced set of problems that they are supposed to solve. If the product is allowed to add features to support an ever-widening base of end uses, the product becomes poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Drupal 8 has actually been significantly rewritten and pretty much all of core does not resemble v7 any more. As someone who started on 6 and has done a lot of work on 7 I am very happy with the significant effort core maintainers have put into modernising and improving it. The entire hook system will be almost completely eradicated by 9. Unfortunately it still remains a CMS that takes a few years of practice before you can start making maintainable, solid and consistent sites because there are several approaches to site building and modules sometimes make it hard to follow a particular paradigm. For instance, Commerce enforces you to implement Rules via the UI, even if you don't like to use Rules (I don't). So while I agree 7 is pretty bad, the legacy code is being very aggressively removed now and having delivered a couple of sites with 8 I would call the developer experience vastly improved. There are new v8 modules such as YAMLform that make the previous contenders (Webform) look downright pathetic relative to how long they've been in development.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
spacebard posted:This is surprisingly accurate though I disagree with the last bit. In fact there are times with any pre-built system such as Embraco, Tritium, Drupal, Wordpress, etc... that you're getting paintbrushes and you really want that unique paintbrush because client said so and won't loving budge. Yeah, I can appreciate that. One of the Drupal projects I'm dealing with right now is very much like that. The client has a specific way they did things in their previous terrible CMS and blast it they're going to keep doing things that way even if vanilla Drupal is completely unsuited for the task. So I'm reinventing a lot of wheels. On the other hand I have another client that demanded we use Drupal because their in house IT person doesn't like WordPress. It doesn't matter that the site is incredibly simple and would be brainless to develop in WordPress without using a single plugin, and it doesn't matter that it's not going to live on a server their IT person manages. They just want it because they want it. Thankfully I'm in the position to turn down future Drupal work, so I'm just going to do that. Thermopyle posted:The reason that that quote is accurate is that both are terrible and generally people don't see the terribleness if they're used to it. Most codebases approach terribleness as they get older if they don't have a strictly enforced set of problems that they are supposed to solve. If the product is allowed to add features to support an ever-widening base of end uses, the product becomes poo poo. This.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Thanks for the java/javascript clarification, that'd definitely trip me up. And yeah, most restaurant websites are terrible so in fairness I am proud of the improvements I've made. I'll never understand the pdf-only menu thing. I put download links if people want them at the bottom of the page but the menu proper is just a normal page. We don't use opentable but we do have a web-based reservation system; since we only do reservations two nights a week it works out OK.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:The reason that that quote is accurate is that both are terrible and generally people don't see the terribleness if they're used to it. Most codebases approach terribleness as they get older if they don't have a strictly enforced set of problems that they are supposed to solve. If the product is allowed to add features to support an ever-widening base of end uses, the product becomes poo poo. Yeah, I watch this discussion with some bemusement. Django for me hits the sweet spot, when coupled with a home rolled CMS that ONLY gives the client what they need, to develop rapidly yet precisely. Deployments happen with a minimum of fuss because everything about them can be automated, none of the work other than content load needs doing through a web UI so we can make concise effective development processes, and the batteries included nature of good development frameworks mean that we don't actually spend anytime reinventing the wheel on Forms, Security, Databases, etc. Like, Wordpress and Drupal were top dog when there weren't good development frameworks out there, but now there are in any language you care to write, and the best ones make it very easy to iterate quickly, and while you don't get as many plugins, I feel like you get a far 'smoother' development process where you don't end up hitting walls that cost you heavily on a budget. My opinion is coloured by working on very custom sites, but honestly I prefer working on those because they get some budget, and rather than extract money out of anyone testing the waters on their site with a super slim budget, I try to push them to another developer or Shopify or Squarespace or something. It helps that I learned Django pretty well before trying this approach commercially, but I don't regret working in it for a second, we hit our estimates and get to charge well, so it's all happy days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Who here is decent with responsive image replacement CSS? I'm still pretty new to all this and am trying to figure out a better way to write this chunk of code, as it would shave off a ton of (potentially) unneeded CSS. So I have this main image at the top of my page that needs to be resized/replaced with another image in 3 viewport width sizes: 320px, 480px, and 600px; The first two images have to be 116px tall, but to do that I need to resize the original images appropriate and replace the 320px viewport with a (260px/116px) image, and the 480px viewport with a (420px/116px) image. The code looks like this: code:Is there a way to use the image i've used for the 480px viewport size, and re-use it for the 320 viewport, only cropping out the extra width of the image so that it only shows a 260px by 116px image in its place? I apologize if that sounds a bit confusing, but what I have working right now is just too taxing on the current site i'm working on, and i'm trying to replace any areas I can with cleaner code whenever possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Just change the image url to be the same. The container doesn't care about how big a background image is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
The picture element is probably what you're looking for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:Just change the image url to be the same. The container doesn't care about how big a background image is. It has to be specified in order to push the previous image out of the way, else it will show both images overlapping one another. EDIT: So I took the advice and was able to cut out the media queries for the 420px viewport since the height of the original image exceeds 116px. One down, two more to go! White Light fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
How do you guys like to do usability testing? Meaning screen readers and other aids to the visually impaired. I've heard Chrome sucks for it, but that would surprise me... a bit, at least.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
I'm trying to connect to my web server's mySQL database from my website, but its not working. Any idea what the issue is? It works fine on local copies but not on the web server. Thanks in advance for any help. e: vvvvvvvvvv Thanks! Couldn't for the life of me find out how to debug this crap. denzelcurrypower fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Nov 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
500: check server's error.log
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Is there any standard for wholesale -> retailer website integration for supporting drop shipments? That's a fairly wide net as it is and could mean so many things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Is anyone familiar with Google Rich Snippets? I'm trying to work out why some pages on a site show ratings in Google search results while others don't. A working example: https://www.whiskyshop.com/glenmorangie-milsean  Not working example: https://www.whiskyshop.com/ardbeg-uigeadail-2327  In Google's own Structured Data Testing Tool they both have the exact same hreview-aggregate values. Is there something I'm missing? Why would Google only pick up the review microdata on one of the SERPs?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
nexus6 posted:Is anyone familiar with Google Rich Snippets? They just do. Sometimes it's because one of the pages has been crawled for longer and Google "digests" it eventually, and in other cases it just doesn't show the metadata. I believe clicks through on the link have an effect as well, but haven't bothered to look (e.g. more trafficed pages are more likely to get it). I'm talking about from the ecommerce perspective as well, though I'm mostly concerned with price/instock since no one ever reviews the products  EDIT-Okay, that's kind of weird. I added 150 products on Monday and they've been indexed and are all showing up with metadata so now I have no idea, unless it's going to disappear eventually. These products get no traffic really because they're so new, and I'm using the same code to generate structured data for each product. Scaramouche fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Nov 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
I want to use PHPMailer to send a message from my server email account. e: turns out I didn't specify the sender which stopped it from being sent denzelcurrypower fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
When you're designing layouts to show to a client as a mock-up, what do you use? I've used Photoshop for years, but it's frustrating to do web-like things in it such as "floating" a picture in some text. I'm almost at the point where mocking something up in straight up HTML is easier than Photoshop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
nexus6 posted:Is anyone familiar with Google Rich Snippets? Pretty sure these are seller ratings ad extensions. BJPaskoff posted:When you're designing layouts to show to a client as a mock-up, what do you use? I've used Photoshop for years, but it's frustrating to do web-like things in it such as "floating" a picture in some text. I'm almost at the point where mocking something up in straight up HTML is easier than Photoshop. I use Sketch for design and Omnigraffle for annotations and flows. The world desperately needs a design tool that focuses on the business of design deliverables and design communication, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Pretty sure these are seller ratings ad extensions. No, there are a few examples if you search site:whiskyshop.com and they are different. The rating and number of reviews come from reviews of the products themselves, not the seller. Besides, if it was the seller that still wouldn't explain why it doesn't appear for every item the seller has.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
BJPaskoff posted:When you're designing layouts to show to a client as a mock-up, what do you use? I've used Photoshop for years, but it's frustrating to do web-like things in it such as "floating" a picture in some text. I'm almost at the point where mocking something up in straight up HTML is easier than Photoshop. I use Illustrator. It's way easier to work with than Photoshop. I've tried to use Sketch but the Adobe keyboard shortcuts are too deeply ingrained in my mind. I gave Adobe XD a try several months ago but it was hilariously useless. Like, it didn't even have a real color picker, just the standard OS X "choose a crayon color" picker. Supposedly it has been updated and I think it had its official release today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Sketch all the way. Usually my flow involves making a presentation of the designs on another page in sketch and exporting those to a PDF. I do enjoy commenting and discussing in Invision if a phone call can't happen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
BJPaskoff posted:When you're designing layouts to show to a client as a mock-up, what do you use? I've used Photoshop for years, but it's frustrating to do web-like things in it such as "floating" a picture in some text. I'm almost at the point where mocking something up in straight up HTML is easier than Photoshop. Sketch, or preferably HTML.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
I know this thread isn't meant for critique but the threads in CC are dead as doornails. I just rewrote my website and would love any opinions on it. I'm actively looking for work so I'm trying to put my best foot forward. https://jered.io
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Looks good to me, nice and clean. Make sure you put a limit on your vw font-sizes. On my 2560 wide monitor this happens:
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Yeah I'm trying to tweak that section so it looks good on all screen sizes. I wanted to use vw so it would automatically scale but it's inside of a Bootstrap grid so it looks wonky on some sizes. I think I'll just have to scrub it out into media queries. Thanks for the feedback! Edit: "Currently Loving" should now respect viewport size better. Anony Mouse fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Nov 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 12:00
|
|
|
Cross posting from the front end thread since they all have their heads up the rear end of webpack discusion. What is the easiest/lightest way to implement routing. I'm not looking to really use any features out of a framework besides the routing and possibly modals and form validation. Please recommend something for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
If you just want certain code to run when you go to certain routes, flatiron director may be worth a look: https://github.com/flatiron/director
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 14:24
|
|
|
Anony Mouse posted:I know this thread isn't meant for critique but the threads in CC are dead as doornails. Maybe some alt text on the past clients to satisfy the "that logo rings a bell, but I can't place it" curiosity. (B & O? Driving me nuts.) The shapes > technologies mouseovers are nice, and this is personal preference for sure, but I find the animations a bit startling - slowing them down to something like 1.2 - 1.5 of their current time might be something to consider. Really nice though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Anony Mouse posted:I know this thread isn't meant for critique but the threads in CC are dead as doornails. All in all, very nice. The 'Work' section has some stuff I am not a fan of though. The shrink animation when I hover over the screens feels jarring and unnecessary, and when I click them, the modal takes up so much room it doesn't feel like I know how to dismiss it. I *knew* because I am familiar with that UI patter, and I clicked in the tiny strip of space, but it may not be obvious to all, so maybe an explicit close control in the top right corner? For 'clients', it would be nice to know what you did for them. Even just a hover that says "NAPSTER: UI design and blah blah" so it's not just a "I dropped some logos here!" thing. Really nice though, and your work is very impressive!
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
ModeSix posted:Cross posting from the front end thread since they all have their heads up the rear end of webpack discusion. I think it may be at least in part because the routing solutions goons are using aren't framework agnostic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
ModeSix posted:Cross posting from the front end thread since they all have their heads up the rear end of webpack discusion. I would recommend Angular, as I tend to. If you are looking for in-app routing and form validation, that IS basically the use case it was designed for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
Kekekela posted:I think it may be at least in part because the routing solutions goons are using aren't framework agnostic. No, it's because we're all jerks talking about modern front end stuff in the modern front end thread. I'd have suggested React Router, but there wasn't enough info to make a guess at what the rest of his code looked like.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
Edit: Nevermind
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 13:42
|
|