1
spidersilk
FCKeditor with Xoops 2.0? And if not, how bad is 2.2?
  • 2006/3/15 3:08

  • spidersilk

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 28

  • Since: 2005/11/10


Is there any way to install FCKeditor, in any form, with XOOPS 2.0? Preferably in such a way that it will work with News 1.44 and/or Magazine?

And if not... How bad is XOOPS 2.2? I know it has "NOT RECOMMENDED" all over it on the download page, but why exactly is that? What's wrong with it?

Right now, the one XOOPS site I've built is running 2.0, with AMS and the Koivi editor, but the clients I built it for hate it and are phoning me up on a daily basis yelling at me about how awful it is, so I really, really, REALLY need a new solution for them.

Basically, they need a WYWIWYG editor that doesn't choke on content that's copied and pasted from Word. FCKeditor says specifically on its web site that it can handle (and clean up!) content from Word, so it seems like the best choice, but I don't know if I can install it on the site they have now, or if I'd have to upgrade the site to XOOPS 2.2, and if I did that, would I be causing more problems than I'd be solving?

2
Kumonryu_Kid
Re: FCKeditor with Xoops 2.0? And if not, how bad is 2.2?

There's an official reason for this, and hopefully someone will provide that later (and correct my glaring errors)

1) XOOPS 2.0.x is not good with other editors
2) XOOPS 2.2.x Introduced a XOOPS editor framework to allow this to be done easier
2a) XOOPS 2.0.x modules need to be rewritten to be compatible with this
3) XOOPS 2.2.x broke lots of other things, so got put on hold.
4) The upgrade path will be 2.0.x -> 2.3 (RC1 is out now), -> 2.4; and 2.2.x -> 2.4, so the trees will merge again.

I need a good editor cross module, cross platform, cross browser and I like FCK. However, My reasons for this is to allow image upload, which is/should be turned off in XOOPS as it's a security hole.

I believe this can be done, but I've yet to see an authoratative guide on how idiots like me can do this.

Hope this helps,
Gareth
Don't follow me, I'm lost too!

3
spidersilk
Re: FCKeditor with Xoops 2.0? And if not, how bad is 2.2?
  • 2006/3/15 8:27

  • spidersilk

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 28

  • Since: 2005/11/10


OK, so it's not so much that there's anything horrifically wrong with XOOPS 2.2 as that it headed off in a different direction from the rest? Would it be feasible to use 2.2 if I made sure that any modules on it were compatible (i.e from the module packs available or others that said they were compatible -- I know News 1.44 is)? Or are there major bugs in it that are likely to cause problems even if I do make sure the modules are compatible?

I suppose another question is whether there will be any security updates for 2.2. I know most PHP scripts that are actively maintained get periodic updates as security holes are found and fixed -- do you know if 2.2 will be getting these, or only 2.0?

BTW, on that note, uploading images is a must for this site, and I don't think it constitutes a security risk given that the only people using the submit form will be the editors (it's an online magazine). So nobody below the webmasters level of privilege will be uploading anything.

4
frankblack
Re: FCKeditor with Xoops 2.0? And if not, how bad is 2.2?
  • 2006/3/15 8:33

  • frankblack

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 830

  • Since: 2005/6/13


Perhaps you want to give inbetween a try (based on tinyeditor)?

Quote:
Basically, they need a WYWIWYG editor that doesn't choke on content that's copied and pasted from Word.


inbetween has this feature (paste-plugin) too and it is working.

Quote:
I need a good editor cross module, cross platform, cross browser and I like FCK. However, My reasons for this is to allow image upload, which is/should be turned off in XOOPS as it's a security hole.


The last thing about this was, that this has been resolved in the latest official FCK.

inbetween allows image uploads too and I tried! to tighten security with a few steps:

a) upload in defined directories
b) extension-check
c) mimetype-check (if in range of valid mimetypes)
d) getimagesize-check (if files has image dimensions)
e) the use of phpThumb makes it harder to upload manipulated images
f) lots of permissions are added to define which group is allowed to make uploads or even use the WYSIWYG-editor

You'll find right now plenty of information on how to implement this module - in the forum or in the manual which is inside the module. Since uploads are not allowed on xoops.org anymore I provided a link to 1.15 inside the comments to this module.

5
Kumonryu_Kid
Re: FCKeditor with Xoops 2.0? And if not, how bad is 2.2?

spidersilk:

2.2.4 is the last release in the 2.2 tree. I think no more work is being done. You should eventually be able to upgrade to 2.4, when the separate streams come back together.

As for the security hole, I think it may be that this vuln could be attacked indirectly. I would have thought a decent chmod would protect this, but haven;t had chance to look.

Your best bet for module compatability is to install a separate copy of the site and test everything. I tried an early 2.2 and it broke my (test) site, I'm evaluating again now from the ground up.

frankblack:

I'll evaluate inbetween. Thanks for the pointer.
Don't follow me, I'm lost too!

6
maxima
Re: FCKeditor with Xoops 2.0? And if not, how bad is 2.2?
  • 2006/4/24 1:23

  • maxima

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 152

  • Since: 2006/3/4 4


I have downloaded and installed INBETWEEN on XOOPS 2.0.13.2
and have played with the controls but how do I implement it in all areas that use the DHTML form or even on any one?

Login

Who's Online

126 user(s) are online (115 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 126


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: May 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits