Well, it might be a little bit of an exageration to call this a review, and I'm sure I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said before, but: WF-Downloads rocks!

I have been evaluating a number of different XOOPS modules (and building one too) for meeting the specialized needs of a client, and WF-Downloads is the first module of any kind (not just download modules) that I have looked at that is full featured enough not to need any tweaking to meet our needs.

That is really impressive. To put it another way, this module is truly professional grade, commercial quality software, right out of the box.

One of the biggest features that makes it that way, I think, is the complete group permission system. This is a must for any module that strives to be used in an "enterprise" environment. There has to be a way for different groups to have their own access permissions specified to the content in the module. (The only shortcoming I've noticed so far in the WF-Downloads permission system is that when users upload a file, they are allowed to categorize it in a category which they don't have view permission for. I would suggest restricting the category list on the user upload page to only the categories the user is allowed to view, so that private categories that are supposed to be unknown to other users remain unknown.)

The recommend link, plus the ratings options, plus the very complete set of metadata that you can record for each file, also go a long way to making this module stand out.

Helpful and non-cryptic install instructions are also a big plus. (Though a nitpick: I would have appreciated a note explaining what the changes are in the xoops.js file that you have to use -- I did a diff on the wf version of that and the existing verion in my XOOPS installation, and I probably would have done a diff anyway even if the install instructions had said what the differences were, but it would be just a nice extra touch for users who aren't able to easily do a diff if they were told what the changes are and why they're necessary).

Anyway, all in all, I just wanted to say I'm impressed and kudos to the WF-Project Team, you deserve it.

--Julian

While I'm not a 'pro' reviewer, I'd like to add my support for this module too.

We are a small team of 8 that have our own Class A network for which I had to apply our XOOPS system. We have a huge range of licensed software (about 200 items) that is all now nicely catergorised, easily accesible and the user knows everything there is to know about what they are downloading before they click 'download.

The WF-Projects team were massively supportive and even went to great lengths to change certain elements of the module to suit my needs (was built into version 2.0.5 I believe).

My only criticism is that display wise, it does not handle significant catergory nesting very well. The index page is superb, but then, once you click on a sub-cat, things go a bit wonky. But again, I'm told by Liquid that they'll be addressing that in version 2.0.6.

A great module, a great team. Great work guys!

Quote:

Original:
function showImgSelected(imgId, selectId, imgDir, extra, xoopsUrl) {
if (xoopsUrl == null) {
xoopsUrl = "./";
}
imgDom = xoopsGetElementById(imgId);
selectDom = xoopsGetElementById(selectId);
imgDom.src = xoopsUrl + "/"+ imgDir + "/" + selectDom.options[selectDom.selectedIndex].value
+ extra;
}

Changed:
function showImgSelected(imgId, selectId, imgDir, extra, xoopsUrl) {
if (xoopsUrl == null) {
xoopsUrl = "./";
}
imgDom = xoopsGetElementById(imgId);
selectDom = xoopsGetElementById(selectId);
if (selectDom.options[selectDom.selectedIndex].value != "") {
imgDom.src = xoopsUrl + "/"+ imgDir + "/" + selectDom.options[selectDom.selectedIndex].value + extra;
} else {
imgDom.src = xoopsUrl + "/uploads/blank.gif";
}
}

Having worked a bit more with the module, I feel I must add a caveat: the different group and user permission settings are indeed good, but there seem to be a few checks not being done here and there that ought to be done. To put it another way, without stating the problem outright: obscurity is not security.

Also, I found that if user submissions was turned off, but certain groups had been given permission to submit files, then the submit link below the a b c 1 2 3 browse links did disappear, but users of the specified groups did get a submit link in the menu, which all seemed to make sense to me, except when those users clicked on the submit link in the menu, they got a message saying they did not have permission to submit files. So if the "users cannot submit" setting overrides giving specific submit perms to a group (which I don't think it should by the way), then at least turn off drawing of the submit link in the menu to avoid confusing users.

As it stands, the only way I've found to restrict the users who can make submissions, is to hand out module admin rights to certain groups and make people upload files through the admin interface.

A problem we've encountered with that interface though: files don't automatically inherit the access permissions of the category you upload them to. You have to specify the permissions for each file you upload.

Nonetheless, it is a feature packed module and generally works as intended out of the box. With some polish and a bit of obscure bug fixing, it would indeed be perfect.

--Julian

One ittitating aspect of blocks is that they can only have one name. Thus although we can separtate groups and their up/download activities, we can not make their respective blocks separate, they have to be shared.

This can be a problem ... A block called 'latest luscious ladies, could only be appropriate to one group. So how could the same site show 'Latest Christian lectures' Even though as groups they could both exist totally independently? We need separtae blocks creation for each group.

Mmm,not a wf-download problem, per-se, but someone needs to consider this blocks issue as modules become more advanced and extensive regarding groups permissions.

Yes, group permission control is a big deal once you start to divide users into lots of groups, especially if those groups represent entirely different audiences (ie: Luscious Ladies and Christians, totally different groups, as opposed to New York City Volunteers and Washington Volunteers, different groups but related to each other).

It can be a chore to manage XOOPS sites that push these groups boundaries.

--Julian

I like this module very much.
But it has one drawback that is it overwrites existing file when upload a file which has the same file name.

edit: never mind, I found a link to the WF modules site.