Before posting a new PLIP into Plone tracker just wanted to be sure we really
need this small feature in plone core.
The main idea is to add publication date to byline viewlet as described in this
I already implemented this functionality as an addon:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/collective.improvedbyline and want to know your
opinions. And if we really want this feature go into Plone then will be anybody
willing to second my PLIP?
Thank you for yours replies!
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here
Plone-developers mailing list
+1. I've switched to showing the publication date on most sites I've
built. I'll happily second it.
I'm a bit worried that it takes three years, an add-on product and a
PLIP to get a few lines of template improvement into the core.
s h a r i n g m a k e s s e n s e
"The web is not a destination, it's an interface." Great
#socialmedia talk by @VenessaMiemis http://t.co/Fhq6ueQd via
Just commit the change; it'll start a small fire, a bit of debate on
the checkins list, but ultimately the bureaucrats will cave in and
+1 to improving Plone in small ways without the unnecessary
bureaucracy and kill-joy.
Its the way it goes. If you want something down, you have to do it yourself often and not complain. Everyone has lots of things going on...
Fwiw, putting it in an addon first is a really good way to go about these changes.
I really disagree with this. The result is a gazillion miniscule,
untested and frankly speaking, "silly" add-ons.
Why not just:
1. Commit change to feature branch;
2. Ask for a review on the developer list;
3. Merge into mainline, or create add-on, or discard altogether.
If you must, PLIP it – and that's obviously required for large or
important changes. This clearly isn't one of those. I would have just
committed it directly into the mainline and perhaps notified the list
after the fact, i.e. "heads up, I changed the byline".
this is all result of triaging old tickets that was started by eleddy.
i personally dont have much time, but to triage 3-5 tickets a week
what i've learn while looking at tickets is that there are many many good
for plips if not even some really nasty bugfixes that we just never merged.
hope i convinced you to join triaging tickets :)
View this message in context: http://plone.293351.n2.nabble.com/PLIP-proposal-Make-byline-use-be-the-publication-date-if-it-exists-tp7382171p7384268.html
Sent from the Core Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Changes like this can be done easly when you do a flag on the control
panel which states "Show the publication date?" default to False. In
this way, nothing changes and who likes it can just put this new entry
in hos site profile :)
In the template you just add a condition but if it is not activated,
We want users to have this UI improvement by default. I don't think it
needs to be configurable through a setting. Sites that want something
different to stock Plone should just override the template.
Actually this small improvement is a bit more than just one line template update
(at least as it looks to me), that's why I moved that bug to a PLIP. Please,
check it out and let me know what do you think:
I prefer the simple template update approach (which doesn't really
require a plip as others have mentioned.) This seems over-complex to
i used that product quite some times and its exactly what i would expected from
Plone to do by default. for my opinion its not overcomplex. i would say +1 to
vitaliy to implement what he started 3 years ago :)
email sent from notmuch.vim plugin
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:38:58 +0000, Laurence Rowe <l <at> lrowe.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 19 March 2012 12:33, Vitaliy Podoba <vitaliypodoba@...> wrote:
> > > Actually this small improvement is a bit more than just one line template
> > > update
> > > (at least as it looks to me), that's why I moved that bug to a PLIP.
> > > Please,
> > > check it out and let me know what do you think:
> > > https://dev.plone.org/ticket/8699
> > I prefer the simple template update approach (which doesn't really
> > require a plip as others have mentioned.) This seems over-complex to
> > me now.
> i used that product quite some times and its exactly what i would expected from
> Plone to do by default. for my opinion its not overcomplex. i would say +1 to
> vitaliy to implement what he started 3 years ago :)
Ok, then let's wait for Framework Team decision.
I also think that simply displaying Effective Date is not as useful as using
real publication date. But of course, use cases are different so both approaches
could have their applications.
I thought the effective date is the real publication date? It is set
when you publish an item. It is useful for this to be an editable
field for occasions when you want to change what's displayed e.g.
after revamping an old news article you might update the effective
date to make it look current
Yes, it's set on first item publication. But it won't be updated in case object
was retracted and then published again. So we'll usually get old publish date
thus manual synchronization will be required. But, yes, from the other side it
may be useful to manipulate publication date manually.
Honestly saying I don't have a strong opinion on which approach is better and
most often used. Kind of survey would help us to determine the best solution. So
I'm waiting for Framework Team resolution.
I thought this was gracefully covered in your original proposal:
"Published xx, modified yy".
s h a r i n g m a k e s s e n s e
Beautiful! Thanks for sharing this. @fdomon: #SNA ? no, just art