Firstly let me say that for me this is a great package. Really very impressed with it so far.
Having said that I've noticed some small bugs and have some questions about the purpose of certain aspects. Will you be setting up a bug reporting section here or on codeplex? Additionally will you be creating some documentation to explain, for example, the purpose of each of the doctypes (for instance - I'm not sure what Folder: Blog or Folder: Pages are for)
I'll be doing another release in the next couple days. Hopefully I've taken care of the bugs that you noticed :)
Regarding documentation, I guess like most projects it gets done after the release :)
To answer your question about doctypes, I have to firstly say this... Developers often spend time to make the public facing site great and usable, but leave the cms editor (your client) with something ugly, unintuitive, and hard to use.
I'm all about pretty icons, categorisation of doctypes, and intuitive content layout. My main goal is always to make the content tree layout and doctypes nice and organised.
As far as I know, the only way to get different icons is via different doctypes, but more doctypes lets you do more. They allow you to restrict the cms editor to creating only a certain type of node which is what I really like.
In general I like to prefix my doctypes with Landing, SubLanding, Category, Folder for levels of navigation and categorisation. I didn't have to prefix with "Folder"
Folder: Blog and Folder: Pages are really just containers to keep the interface neat. Folder : Pages can obviously only contain Page nodes, Folder: Blog contains year folders. The rest is all pretty self explainitory.
I appreciate your ethos on doctypes and cms structure, I think that is a good way to go. I wasn't sure what was intended when I installed since using multiple blog folders (which I thought was the purpose) didn't make any difference to the output.
I'll get around to raising the few bugs I've found tomorrow.
Bug reporting/documentation
Hello,
Firstly let me say that for me this is a great package. Really very impressed with it so far.
Having said that I've noticed some small bugs and have some questions about the purpose of certain aspects. Will you be setting up a bug reporting section here or on codeplex? Additionally will you be creating some documentation to explain, for example, the purpose of each of the doctypes (for instance - I'm not sure what Folder: Blog or Folder: Pages are for)
Thanks!
Stuart
Good suggesion about bug reporting...
Here you go...
http://our.umbraco.org/projects/starter-kits/ublogsy/ublogsy-bugs
I'll be doing another release in the next couple days. Hopefully I've taken care of the bugs that you noticed :)
Regarding documentation, I guess like most projects it gets done after the release :)
To answer your question about doctypes, I have to firstly say this... Developers often spend time to make the public facing site great and usable, but leave the cms editor (your client) with something ugly, unintuitive, and hard to use.
I'm all about pretty icons, categorisation of doctypes, and intuitive content layout. My main goal is always to make the content tree layout and doctypes nice and organised.
As far as I know, the only way to get different icons is via different doctypes, but more doctypes lets you do more. They allow you to restrict the cms editor to creating only a certain type of node which is what I really like.
In general I like to prefix my doctypes with Landing, SubLanding, Category, Folder for levels of navigation and categorisation. I didn't have to prefix with "Folder"
Folder: Blog and Folder: Pages are really just containers to keep the interface neat. Folder : Pages can obviously only contain Page nodes, Folder: Blog contains year folders. The rest is all pretty self explainitory.
I hope that answers your questions.
Thanks for the quick reply!
I appreciate your ethos on doctypes and cms structure, I think that is a good way to go. I wasn't sure what was intended when I installed since using multiple blog folders (which I thought was the purpose) didn't make any difference to the output.
I'll get around to raising the few bugs I've found tomorrow.
Thanks again,
Stuart
Ok so the new version is up. I'm exceptionally happy with my rss import tool :)
is working on a reply...