New Modular Add-on System - Looking for Testers

[Jon W]

@Jon W Signed up but getting no activation email.

Thanks. I'll look into it. I've confirmed your account now.

 

[Mr. Goodie2Shoes]

"girly looking website" LOL

 

[Rob]

That's just Jon trying to fill a niche in forumland whilst getting (very) in touch with his feminine side

 

[Jon W]

That's just Jon trying to fill a niche in forumland whilst getting (very) in touch with his feminine side

My wife's first comment as soon as she saw it: "Jon, aren't you going to scare off all your male customers."

 

[Rob]

Maybe the ones without a sweet tooth

 

[Mr. Goodie2Shoes]

@Jon W maybe you should send a cake to each one of us alpha testers?

 

[Jon W]

@Jon W maybe you should send a cake to each one of us alpha testers?

I could probably buy @Rob a cake, but probably easier if you buy/make a cake and then send me the bill. I don't think they travel particularly well!

 

[Daniel Hood]

I could probably buy @Rob a cake, but probably easier if you buy/make a cake and then send me the bill. I don't think they travel particularly well!

Plus I imagone the international food shipping costs are pretty intense.

 

[Mr. Goodie2Shoes]

dangit

 

[Liam W]

more code can be shared between add-ons, meaning much more efficient add-ons and code that is much easier to understand.

I disagree with this statement. I find it much harder to understand shared code.

Ah, shucks. I spoiled the fun mood Sorry!

Liam

 

[Jake B.]

I find it much harder to understand shared code.

oO why's that?

 

[Yoskaldyr]

@Jon W, are you create this add-on only as a core for own add-ons or as base core for other developers?

Because I think such add-on will be useless for developers without documentation of API and without PHPDoc comments (like right now).

What?
What problems resolves add-on?

How?
How exactly it works?

Why?
Why other developers must use it?

 

[Jon W]

@Jon W, are you create this add-on only as a core for own add-ons or as base core for other developers?

Currently just for me, but it will likely be opened up to other developers later.

Because I think such add-on will be useless for developers without documentation of API and without PHPDoc comments (like right now).

I think useless is a bit strong. When XenForo was first released, there was very little documentation for developers or PHPDoc comments, but it offered something not available elsewhere and was well coded, and that made it attractive to developers. That being said, I'm more than happy to make improvements to code to help other developers. I also have a separate add-on which I haven't yet released which contains a number of tools that makes developing add-ons for Cake incredibly easy (i.e., tools for creating and working with modules, etc.).

Although the core Cake software does require a license for use, I see you have noticed that the source is publicly available, which means that other developers can also fork and suggest contributions to the code, which I am very open to.

What?
What problems resolves add-on?

How?
How exactly it works?

These questions have been answered in the first post.

Why?
Why other developers must use it?

There is no must. It is completely up to developers whether or not they see any value in using it. Given that there is a cost to it for end users, I suspect that a vast majority of developers will not use Cake for their add-ons, but only time will tell.

Apparently some developers have discovered the benefit of eating cake while developing WITHOUT the Cake add-on, although I've yet to see any evidence of that.

 

[Yoskaldyr]

Currently just for me

Please add this in the first post and in the add-on description.
Ok, I do not have any questions now

When XenForo was first released, there was very little documentation for developers or PHPDoc comments,

Documentation - yes. But PHPDoc comments were from start in XenForo. XenForo has well coded sources with PHPDoc comments, so documentation was not needed for me.

• only enable the modules you need, meaning your site doesn't load redundant files, template modifications, etc.;

Right now good add-ons do not load any redundant files and template modifications

• code is much easier to read/understand as you can see which feature each block of code relates to.

This is feature for developers or for regular users? Because for developers your add-on is one more level of abstraction without documentation and regular users usually do not look into the code.

I understand that the advertising slogans one of the main things in sales. But your slogans are not fully correct.

I do not want to say that your add-on is bad or something like that. I just think that the better description for it is needed.

 

[Jon W]

Right now good add-ons do not load any redundant files and template modifications

Assuming you want all the features of an add-on. Even turning off an option in the control panel isn't going to stop a template modification from being processed if it is part of an add-on. Having it as a separate module that can not even be installed is the best way to manage this other than having to have several different interdependent add-ons.

This is feature for developers or for regular users? Because for developers your add-on is one more level of abstraction without documentation and regular users usually do not look into the code.

Again, mainly for me at the moment. If I'm going to translate an add-on to make it work with XenForo 2.0, it needs to be easy for me to read. A side effect of that is that it would also be good for other developers, but as I've mentioned before this is not yet a main priority. Regular users who have some understanding of code may also find this beneficial.

I understand that the advertising slogans one of the main things in sales. But your slogans are not fully correct.

Which "slogan" is not correct?

 

[Paul B]

Personally I can't ever imagine releasing an add-on which would be dependent on a paid, branded, third party add-on.

I can see how it's worth you having a common core for all of your add-ons but I can't see how it benefits other developers, considering anything they release is going to have an immediate cost associated with it, but not one they will personally benefit from.

 

[Jon W]

Personally I can't ever imagine releasing an add-on which would be dependent on a paid, branded, third party add-on.

I can see how it's worth you having a common core for all of your add-ons but I can't see how it benefits other developers, considering anything they release is going to have an immediate cost associated with it, but not one they will personally benefit from.

All add-ons already have the cost of XenForo attached to them, but I do agree with you. Personally I would have exactly the same attitude, unless of course I was wanting to extend a paid add-on, like how [AD] Credits extends your paid add-on. But then I am running a company, not doing this as a hobby.

I don't think I'd release an add-on using any third party core, free or not, unless it was already widely in use, and even then it wouldn't be my first choice. I even think twice about requiring something like [BD] Widget Framework, even though it is one of the most used add-ons out there and incredibly easy to develop widgets for. I think my Social Groups add-on includes support for Nodes as Tabs too.

That being said, someone who had Cake installed might find that it was easier to use Cake to develop an add-on that they needed personally and then decide to release it. I would absolutely not want to stop anyone who wanted to do that. In fact, I would want to actively encourage it.

 

[Stuart Wright]

Signed up. I like cake. Presumably one advantage will be that the css and JS for several addons will be combined now.

 

[Jon W]

Signed up. I like cake. Presumably one advantage will be that the css and JS for several addons will be combined now.

Thanks for signing up. Hoping to get back to work on Cake next week.

CSS is combined into a single file by XenForo anyway.

JS can be combined too, although I haven't done it in for any of the currently available add-ons. I might look into other ways of optimising this for other add-on though. I'd welcome any thoughts/suggestions you have as I'm not entirely clear on the advantages of loading fewer js files over the advantages of loading only the files you need on a given page.

 

[drastic]

@Jon W - Messages waiting in your inbox when you get a chance!