On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Joe Van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Jim Gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Jim Gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2008, a
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Jim Gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 18, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Jim Gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 17, 2008, at 10:04 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote:
>>>
This is in production mode. I'm using t
Jay Levitt wrote:
I added Edmund Haselwanter's bug fix to my copy of the "tags" extension
(thanks for that fix!), and now I'm trying to display a tag_cloud. But
I get this error instead of a cloud:
PGError: ERROR: column "meta_tags.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause
or be used in an aggr
Extension announcement: I updated an extension I wrote many months ago
to work with Radiant 0.6.9. It does just what you think: host multiple
separate websites on one Radiant instance. Similar to multi_site, but
everything--pages, snippets, and layouts--is separate and you can
specify which users
Today is the Radiant sprint day. I made a proposal for an enhancement
to the standard Radius tags:
http://pastie.org/300372
I've implemented this now in my own fork of Radiant. Check it out here:
http://github.com/nelstrom/radiant/tree/master
I'd be interested to hear of any
Sorry. I didn't want to come across so preachy. I agree with you. It
bugs me too.
If, however, I ask myself whether it would bother a non-techy -- someone
who not only doesn't know xml but who's never even heard of it -- then
I'd bet nearly all would prefer something like:
to
But the
Ok, you're right.
For me, would not feel right, though.
Manuel
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Chris Parrish
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Manuel Meurer wrote:
I think that there is a place for these tags and I'd love it if there
was
an easy way to use this to create both if_
Manuel Meurer wrote:
I think that there is a place for these tags and I'd love it if there was
an easy way to use this to create both if_ and unless_ tags. Something like:
conditional_tags "my_tag" do |tag|
#return a boolean
false
end
which would then create if_my_tag and unless_my_tag tags.
>> I think that there is a place for these tags and I'd love it if there was
>> an easy way to use this to create both if_ and unless_ tags. Something like:
>>
>> conditional_tags "my_tag" do |tag|
>> #return a boolean
>> false
>> end
>>
>> which would then create if_my_tag and unless_my_tag tags
Let me know what you're looking for here. My new Conditional Tags
extension already offers a "mode" element that lets you ask if "mode =
'dev'" but it should be quite easy to add a new evaluator (perhaps I
could offer one for the multi_site extension).
I'm not clear exactly what you want eval
Hi folks,
I recently updated the Creating Radiant Extensions tutorial[1], by
removing the references to Scaffolding (dead since Rails 2). Instead
of using scaffolding, I suggested making the LinksController inherit
from the AbstractModelController:
class Admin::LinksController < Admin
Jay,
I think its a good idea to make things unambiguous but taggs just
feels wrong. Why not reuse "taglib" from J2EE? They're basically the
same thing as our tags
Sent from my iPhone
On 25-Oct-08, at 5:56 AM, Jay Levitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The term "tags" is, of necessity, overl
I added Edmund Haselwanter's bug fix to my copy of the "tags" extension
(thanks for that fix!), and now I'm trying to display a tag_cloud. But I
get this error instead of a cloud:
PGError: ERROR: column "meta_tags.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or
be used in an aggregate function : SE
The term "tags" is, of necessity, overloaded in Radiant; we have Radius
tags, and we have radiant-tagging-extension "tagging as in '2.0' and
tagclouds" tags.
That makes it difficult to search for questions, blog posts, etc. on either
type of tag. But "tags" is the right word; it's what everyo
14 matches
Mail list logo
