modal.js and mootools dependency

[ced1870]

Hi all
what about the dependency on mootools and the renew of the modal.js script ?
I know that bootstrap modals are already implemented (few words to tell that I don't think that this is a good idea ...)
but some modals are still using the Mootools Squeezebox and then load Mootools

Is there a plan to migrate the squeezebox ? it would be simple to replace it with a compatible jQuery script that do the same job, and then remove Mootools.
What do you think about this ?
CEd

[Josip Posavec]

That is something i would love, want to get rid of mootools completely, my opinion, JQuery is much better option in any case.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[George Wilson]

In the majority of places we have removed the mootools modals in favour of jQuery's. The remaining few places we tried to remove in 3.5 but ended up reimplementing them in 3.6 - they basically can't be removed without breaking b/c in extensions :( Basically mootools will die for sure in Joomla 4.0 - but I think we've pretty much removed it where it's possible to :(

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 9:08:04 AM UTC+1, crocoast wrote:

That is something i would love, want to get rid of mootools completely, my opinion, JQuery is much better option in any case.

On 06 Apr 2016, at 08:20, ced1870 <ced...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all
what about the dependency on mootools and the renew of the modal.js script ?
I know that bootstrap modals are already implemented (few words to tell that I don't think that this is a good idea ...)
but some modals are still using the Mootools Squeezebox and then load Mootools

Is there a plan to migrate the squeezebox ? it would be simple to replace it with a compatible jQuery script that do the same job, and then remove Mootools.
What do you think about this ?
CEd

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.

[Josip Posavec]

Thats good news, thanks for all the hard work, we dont say it enough, but really great work guys, keep it up.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

[ced1870]

when you say

" we have removed the mootools modals in favour of jQuery's"

do you mean modals from Bootstrap , right ?
this is not the same ni my mind because it still depends on another library ...

it would be easier in my mind to replace the modal.js with one with the same name and that will keep the b/c
easy to create a Squeezebox function to keep the b/c and call the new jquery method, and may be add a message in the console to say that this function is deprecated

[Cyril Rezé]

@ced1870, what not to give a try, and create a PR on Github ? ;-)

[ced1870]

it would be cool :)
My problem is that I'm not familiar with Github and this is always a pain for me to find where to go and how to do to submit some code
I have the JS and CSS file already ;)

It seems that JTooltips (or Tips) is also still on Mootools ?

Le mercredi 6 avril 2016 08:20:36 UTC+2, ced1870 a écrit :

[George Wilson]

There are still lots of functions that use mootools, but Joomla Core doesn't really use them. Certainly all tooltips in core now use the bootstrap tooltips. Of course Tips is still on mootools because it's a built in Mootools function - but it can only be a 3rd party extension loading that...

Kind Regards,

George

[CEd K]

Ok, by my side the only thing that is really important is the modal. Because I don't want to use the Bootstrap ones, which does not work if a template or an extension is overridding Bootstrap with the v3

Also using the Bootstrap modals renders a lot of more code that is totally useless in my mind

So now, I have my .js and .css files of the modal with a jQuery script. What's next ? how to make it test and submit it ?

I'm not familiar with Github

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/RfXat98hO8w/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

[Michael Babker]

Last I looked Squeezebox doesn't have a jQuery compatible version and I don't think the project should either be forking media libraries or writing more libraries for the sake of having options when there's already too much work required and too few contributing to the maintenance.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

[CEd K]

are you saying that using a light script is worth than using the big (obsolete in actual v2) Bootstrap library ?

[Sergio Manzi]

Ced K,

I already have a plugin working for very easily using Fancybox (http://fancyapps.com/fancybox/), and I'm also about rewriting the modal JLayouts  (that now invoke the dreaded BS2 modal) to be used into whatever frontend template.

If you're interested, get in touch with me directly.

Fancybox (which IMHO works superbly), unhappily doesn't have a very friendly licensing (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0), so I'm looking also into using something else and any advice will be greatly appreciated.

Regrads,

smz

[CEd K]

@sergio thank you but I don't need a plugin nor a facnybox :)

I want to contribute to the core to remove the Squeezebox and also don't use the modal from Bootstrap which is a shit (sorry to be honest)

The Sqsueezebox has been discussed a long time ago and I'm surprised to see that has still not be replaced. I suggest a light script made by me which works well for any popup needed in the admin/fields popups to show the options and what you want.

For me the Fancybox and the other libraries are more to be used as a plugin by the final user to show the content (images). I have a Mediabox CK plugin which is designed for this, but this is not what I want to implement in the core

Hope this is clear and hope it helps

[Sergio Manzi]

OK, got it!

My honest feeling is that you will not see happening what you're trying to achieve (and on which I agree) until J! 4...

... and yes, I agree BS2 modals are crap (although I'm the one partially responsible for them to be used right now...)

[CEd K]

"although I'm the one partially responsible for them to be used right now.."

>> really ? lol wow

If you are right, I'm disappointed to see that we can not go ahead with simple things. In my mind, replacing the SqueezeBox by a simple home made script in jQuery will not change anything for the existing modals, and will not break b/c

We are now waiting for a J!4 version which will be very late and for sure the next box will break b/c with the Squeezebox, right ?

[Sergio Manzi]

Do you already have your lightweight script working? I can see if it will be possible to inject it instead of the BS2 modal in the backend only (for B/C reasons, just in case anybody has been crazy enough to use BS2 modals in some frontend template...)

[CEd K]

yes I have it :)

How to give it for testing ?

[Sergio Manzi]

... send it by email, or share on a Google Drive (with my email address as above...)

[CEd K]

OK I send you an email directly :)

Let me know

CEd

[piotr_cz]

In terms of compatibility I think it's best option to port Squeezebox to jQuery API methods would be kept the same and it would be just drop-in replacement.

When looking at the Squeezebox code I have the feeling that it should not be too hard to rewrite (just the code would be uglier). 

[Sergio Manzi]

CEd has sent me his modal JS and I'm looking into it: it should be "Squeezebox compatible", a direct "plug-in" replacement. I'll let you know, but it will take some time as I'll be busy next week.

The problem with all this is that if the final objective is to get rid of Mootools, this will fail, guaranteed 100%, as the modal thing is not the the only and not even main reason why we still need Mootools: thanks to Dimitri Grammatiko's work on the modal I think all the modals (or at least really the vast majority of them, haven't checked if it is indeed all...) have been converted to BS2: ugly, but it works without rquiring Mootools.

We have other dependencies on Mootools, and  the first that comes to my mind is the calendar thing: if you edit articles in front-tend you'll need the calendar for setting "publishing dates" and the likes, and thus we can't get rid of Mootools right now, I guess...

[ced1870]

if the work made on the modal is implemented and successful, we can plan to migrate the other scripts like the calendar. This should not be a problem
For me just that having a small Joomla! script (and not something relying on another library) would be easier.
As for example I have defined the lightbox in a new variable JBox that will progessively replace the Squeezebox with b/c at the beginning

Imagine that we have to migrate this script in few years , we can continue to call it JBox and code it like we want :), all B/C

...

[brian teeman]

Just submit your code as a pull request - otherwise its vaporware

[Bakual]

Please don't invent that stuff ourself. Yes it may be simpler to migrate in future, but the maintenance cost is way higher in the meantime.

[CEd K]

migrating all boxes to BS2 has no cost ? and then migrate to BS 3, and then change for something else ? ...

Sorry I don't understand this answer

[Bakual]

If done with a major version bump (like for J4 when we likely shift the Bootstrap version) it isn't a big task. Remember that we already have an API for loading the modal JS code, so changes in JS calls only have to be done in one place. The rest is adjusting the HTML layouts, which isn't hard and likely has to be done anyway to accomodate for the changed Bootstrap version.

Creating our own modal when there are multiple perfectly working solutions already available is a clear NIH syndrom idea. We should move away from that behavior.

[CEd K]

So if I understand, the ones that decides in the Joomla! world are not interested and will never do the changes that I suggest. Right ?

[Bakual]

Personally, I would hate it, but I'm not the one (anymore) making decisions.

If you really want to propose it, make a PR in GitHub and PLT will have a look if it got tested.

[CEd K]

"Personally, I would hate it"

>> thank you for your honesty ;)

[Fedir]

I am agree with Bakual.

And I think porting existing modal script not worth effort,  in result it will be worst than just use existing with MooTools.

понеділок, 11 квітня 2016 р. 09:57:19 UTC+3 користувач ced1870 написав:

[brian teeman]

At the end of the day this conversation is completely meaningless without a pull request