Which doc do you insert additional meta tags into? For example, I have a safe surf meta I want to use and I *think* I would put it into theme.html for my theme, but I am not sure. So far it's the only document where I see any meta tags at all. I haven't found any yet in the root files. Any help would be appreciated.

I've asked the same question in the past and never got an answer. I uploaded some modules I know worked for me in 2.0.5 but don't even show up as installable in 2.0.6, and I have done nothing to the files. You aren't alone.

If I am understanding your question correctly, when you add new page wrap you can choose whether it is visible, then whether it should be in a submenu. Then that page becomes visible in the submenu off the main tinycontent menu. And if memory serves, I believe the very first tinycontent page you create is what shows up in the main "tinycontent" menu entry in the main menu when you first begin.

You'll have to forgive me. I completely replaced Xoops' main menu (so I could easily split things up into more than one menu category like this site does) and I can't remember all the core main menu things all that well. But I think that is the gist of it.

This time its eGovLinks. Interesting message when I browsed over to it. It appears to be some group called Emperor Security Team or something, I guess. Anyway, check it out if you want to here.

I use tinycontent and freecontent for wrapping static html pages. Both are easy to use and pretty straightforward. I tend to make the pages offsite and upload them. I probably use tinycontent more, but I like freecontent for its wonderful WebDigest.

As far as demos go? I don't know. I don't think you'd see much except wrapped pages. Just download one or two content modules and try them out. You are sure to find one or two that will fit your needs.

Got a little bit further into these article management modules comparisons, but not a lot because I have been working on other parts of my site.

So far, overall, iContent seems to be leading the pack for me. The biggest reason is because it does not automatically assume that only registered users will be writing articles. The other major players seem to default to only registered (or perhaps anonymous) users being able to author articles. I am looking at posting articles written by people who will not ever register at the site.

I love the look of Soapbox but it seems to default to only registered users as article authors and the author has to have his/her own column (unless I am missing something here, which is always possible). I tried leaving the box blank but the authors are then named "Anonymous". If I had the ability to just add the author name I wanted, this would be my choice hands down. And having the ability to use the columns as article categories without being owned by an author would be nice, too.

WF and XF Sections have a boatload of configuration options but I couldn't find how to configure an author other than the person submitting the article or a registered user. I could lay out an article and bring it in but it always shows the author as me.

I've rambled on enough. It's open source and the content modules available are wonderful, actually. I just wish most didn't automatically assume that only registered users would be article authors or submitters.

My wish list for an article manager module:

1. The ability to post articles written by people who are not ever going to register on the site and have them acknowledged accordingly, without having a registered user as the default author.

2. A modern layout as great as Soapbox's.

3. Content automatically searchable by the native XOOPS search function.

4. A configurable/optional default first page, from where you could launch the articles content area.

Just a few of my wishes. Of course, with my luck, one of the available modules will already to these things and I am just too thick to have figured it out already.

My hat's off to the module authors. They have done great work on articles management. I, for one, appreciate it very much.

None of the modules I have uploaded by FTP recently are showing up for installation. At first I thought it was a problem with the individual modules but it can't be. It's not they are having a problem installing, they just aren't showing up at all to be installed. I run 2.0.6 and haven't had any problems as far as I can tell.

I have uploaded iMenu, MultiMenu, WF-Section (JackJ's bug fix version), Soapbox, and some others and none of them show up for installation and the CHMOD data looks okay. It started happening about a week ago. Also, the files all look like they are present and accounted for, size and all.

Anyone have a clue what could be going on here?

Just dl'ed Mozilla tonight and have been running it around the web for a bit. It seems a bit leaner and meaner than IE so far but it's kind of early for me to tell. The memories sure are flooding back from the old Netscape days, for sure.

Anyone out there been using it for a while and could recommend whether I ought to keep it, or maybe forget this silly notion about looking into other browers? Thanks in advance.

Did a quick site search and came up with nothing. Is the new WF-Section available for download anywhere yet?

Not too long ago, I was checking out a few CMS's and was getting really discouraged. Either they had a lot of features, and bells and whistles, and were unwieldy to administer, or they didn't do what I wanted. Then I ran across XOOPS and there's been no turning back.

Are there some things I wish XOOPS had, or did differently? Sure ... but it's always evolving and will only get better. But it has most everything I want at the moment (putting aside my never-ending search for just the right articles management module), and it is so intuitive to use and administer (at least compared with the competition).

The more you use Xoops, the more I think you will come to appreciate all the hard work the devs and others have put into it.