Quote:

Thank you for your comments.

I am not a coder, but assist where I can with support and testing of the modules.

If you have any issues, please address them on the team site.

Regards

Quote:
Why can't it be made public because it is customised? (plea, not criticism )

Quote:

I had been the lead developer of wfsection sincehttp://www.wf-projects.com was established.
For wfsection 2.x series, I felt that it would take too much effort for me considering its codebase and my knowledge on it so after the wfsection 2.05(I even did not remember whether it was released or not) I left it to other developers.
Since then I had been working on wfsection 3, which is re-designed from ground.

I have to say that management is much more important to a large project than expected, WF-projects is yet another example.

I am glad to see that Mr catzwolf has been back to wf-projects and he asked the developers to leave so that he will take over wf modules, again.
I ever said "catzwolf was not willing to leave XOOPS". Actually it is not the first time for him to come back to wfprojects since he left wfsection.xoops2.com and wf-projects.com was then established by Bender and other wf guys.

Anyway, wf projects will move on and the modules labelled with "WF" that we are working on are also progressing.

The article management, which I have been worked on for 6 months almost as full time and was planned to be released as wfsection 3, now is for internal test.
And a stable (former) WFsection 2.08 will be released by a former WFsection developer with a new name, in early June.

Quote:

And so far this is progressing very nicely

First, lets just say I will NOT be taking over at WF-Projects and I have no plan to do so in the future and I don't expect to even expect to consider taking up the postition.

I feel for those of you who have waited for over a year on a working version of WF-Sections but there is nothing I can do about it now. Sorry.

ATB

Catz

Quote:

Because we got asked to create custom editors, custom image manager (less powerful than the default one but... we can only do what the customer wants...), custom printing, custom SEO by page, URL and other... I don't see it being merged back to the official source easily at all.


About WF-Sections and it being abandoned: some modules are just too good and powerful to "die". Someone will maintain them because they are more useful and featured than most of similar others, so I am positive about it going on.

Even the criticized newbb is better than it seems.
Just tweaking it a bit (and most of all removing the "bogus behavior" tied to each image - try HTTPSpy with a newbb page to see what I mean - on our test computers made the module go excruciantly slow to load on Explorer (worked fine on Netscape and Firefox).

Last and not least, we tried most of the DHTML editors out there. The Wysiwyg editor that is already hot on the Xoopseditors list because it's well integrated with XOOPS image editor itself, proved to be the best at being fast, portable, easily customized, can produce real W3C validating XHTML code unlike "cooler editors" like Spaw and others (we had to certify every and each page of the site to be W3C compliant (W3C Validator). We had to fix several minor bugs but they are minor (expecially the property editors - they loaded much stuff off badly built URLS).

We used several other modules too. None was 100% ready "as is" but the overall quality was more than good, so I don't think XOOPS suffers of some "crappy modules" syndrome.
Sure, you will find a module slapped together and released half done and never updated, but they are easy to spot and to avoid.

heard about you a lot catz..

to bad you are not 'taking over' the wf-projects as mentioned... will be real great news for us...

glad to see you around..

Quote:

I am sure that WF-Sections would be abandoned and someone will pick it up, but that someone won't be me. I took oveer the developement of WF-Sections about 3 years ago and I had to give it up for reason which I don't wish to talk about.

The current version is buggy as hell and I did clean out those bugs and added new features, but this version will not see a release except to the site I help work on because I have heavily modified the version of XOOPS we use and I don't want to have to 'revert this back' to work with the current version of Xoops.

ATB

Catz

Quote:

Lot to say there David? lol