module installation does not work! https://github.com/XoopsModules25x/modulebuilder/issues/84

Quote:Wonderful work, Goffy !

Hi luciorota

you can take also https://github.com/XoopsModules25x/modulebuilder and create a simple module.

the created module will use namespaces and will be ready for Xoops 2.5.11 and PHP8
:)

See if this helps:
https://xoops.gitbook.io/xoops-modules-cookbook/migration/namespaces-autoload

Also, which modules are you talking about? Are they on Github?

This inconsistency was first introduced by xBootstrap in XOOPS 2.5.7

While it seems wrong in some ways, the focus was moving away from the big desktop, to the little mobile screen. Along with that, xbootstrap introduced a jumbotron and a slider, both taking over room and function at the top of the page. To keep the contents somewhere within a short distance of the top of the page (especially for mobile devices) something had to give.

While I can see why is seems wrong in a sense, it is also something we've been applying productively since 2014. I'm relatively sure more could break than would be fixed if it changed. It really is quite functional as is.

Hi everybody
I'm looking for a light module (Publisher is a huge module...) to better understand Xoops Modules namespacing and latest Xoops Modules Development techniques
to update some module that I did in the past ...

Thanks in advance for the reply!

Nothing new, here. This has been that way for a long time.

The url xoopscode tag expects a fully qualified URL. Partials lead to security exposures very quickly. There is no one size fits all way to resolve scheme-less URLs. XOOPS can for example work fine in a directory under a domain.

There is a siteurl tag which always prepends the full XOOPS_URL with a trailing slash. That is useful when transferring content between a prototype and a production system without changes.

Hi, XOOPS is not for basic user like you seems to be, for sure.
Yes, i agree with you, XOOPS should be managed by webmasters, not by basic users.

Welcome to basic users.
Forum are here to anwser to your questions and problems.

It's like skiing or driving, you should learn some basic notions.
It would be a lie to say the opposite !

You can use other CMS with click click click like a blackbox
OR
you can be master of your work, Thus, with XOOPS you will have more scope to modify EXCATELY as you want your site, your design, your pages, your style.
XOOPS is not a blackbox, but you need to learn a bit.

For french users, there are some very recent tutorials here

So, in 2 words,
Use blackbox, or if you want to master of your destiny, learn and use XOOPS !



Ps : for activity see this !
No activity ? lol see here too

I hate haters

The source code given by my browser, for the last link is :
Quote:

Note (from Greg)

/class/module.textsanitizer.php
may be @ line 410 (Replace XoopsCodes with their equivalent HTML formatting)

The url should not return a [http] word key if there is no http (or https) in the initial string

I have to echo wayneG's sentiments from way back with the point being nothing seems to have changed in 4 years. XOOPS was listed in my host's softaculous so I thought I'd give it a try. Gave it 3.5hrs today and now I'm walking away. Leaving this message here to help others avoid the same.

Before my reply this thread is still on page 1 of the beginners forum despite being 4 years ago, so not a lot of activity here. Project seems dead. Except, the code still works. But there is no support material written for years, so maybe it's just dead to beginners.

If you're the owner / operator of a site and you want a no-code approach to the use of your time, then unfortunately this falls short. Only for want of supporting material. It has potential, but it will take longer to get to "hello world" than is reasonable.

E.g. XOOPS has no ability to let you start publishing on its own, you have to manually add modules with a file manager in the back end on the server first. Like it's 2010. Then you immediately have to work around the lack of docs, like the first recommended module of Xmcontent will not run when uploaded, it gives "Handler does not exist" errors out of the box. But if you rename its subfolder from default xmcontent-1.5Final to xmcontent then it works. I can think of several tech reasons why but first impressions are that I don't want to care.

XOOPS for a complete owner/operator no-code experience seems possible with just a few enhancements (like loading modules via a GUI) and some fresh documentation.

Not a criticism such as a disappointment, and a warning to other softaculous users.

Maybe I will check in looking for more docs in future. My hopes aren't high though, given the "Buy a 6 year old book " response above in 2017 and almost nothing written in the 4 years since.