I know it has great out-of-the-box features but is it easy to customize?
Like when I query stuff from the database or change css layouts.
Is it faster to create my own modules for it or just go on and write everything from scratch using frameworks like Cake
I'm currently working on an Elgg-based site and I absolutely hate it. The project was near completion when I stepped in, but the people who created were no longer available, so I took it over as a freelancer.
As a personal impression, you are much better off writing the app from scratch in a framework. I don't know if the people before me butchered it, but the code looks awful, the entity-based relationship model is wierd to say the least and debugging is horrendous. Also, from my point of view, it doesn't scale very well. If you were to have a consistent user base, I'd be really really worried.
It keeps two global objects ($vars and $CONFIG) that have more than 5000(!) members loaded in memory on each page. This is a crap indicator.
I've worked extensively with cake. With Elgg, for about a month in a project that is on QA stage right now.
My advise is: if you need something quick with a lot of features and you only need to customize a little, go with Elgg.
If you're going to customize a lot and you can afford the development of all the forums, friends, invites, etc. features, go with Cake or any other MVC framework.
I have been working on a Elgg site for the past month or so, its code is horrible, however it's not the worst I've seen :D. it's not built for programmers like Drupal is :D. But it's not too bad. Once I got a handle on the metadata functions and read most of the code I was able to navigate it well and create custom modules and such.
What would help immensely would be some real documentation and explanation of the Elgg system. I don't think that's going to happen though :).
Out of the box there are a few problems, there are some bugs that haven't been fixed for a while and I've had to go in and fix them myself. Overall, you can make it pretty and it has some cool functions, but i wouldn't dive in until i had read the main core code to get a handle on what's happening on the backend.
Oh and massive use of storing values in globals. and a crap ton of DB calls (same with Drupal though).
i wonder if the use of storing everything, and i mean everything for your site in the globals will really hinder the server if you have a massive user load.
If you want to build a product based on a social networking platform/framework then Elgg is definately a good way to go. The code is not that bad if you actually look before leaping and doing what elgg expects. You go against its processes and structures and it will leave you beaten by the side of the road.
Developing modules/plugins or editing CSS is easy and Elgg does give you great flexability to basically build your own product ontop of it. Dolphin, as comparrison, does not allow you to do anything outside of what it expects you to do.
If you however just need a framework (not primarily for social networking etc) with some user based functionality then i suggest Cake, or if your project is HUGE then maybe Symfony or Zend. They all have plugins you can download and use/hack which would be easirer to adjust for personalised needs.
To show what you can do with elgg here is a site Mobilitate we built with Elgg 1.7. This is a very complicated website and was built ontop of Elgg.
We are starting a new project with Elgg 1.8. The new version is a major improvement they have made a lot of elements easier, incorporated better JS and CSS implementation/structure and have better commented their own code.
Elgg's database schema is horrific. They've essentially implemented a NoSQL database in SQL. It completely defeats the purpose of using a relational table structure.
If you can ignore this, and aren't doing much customization, you might be OK with Elgg. If not, STAY AWAY.
I've been working with Elgg for over a year. It is easier to customize than it would be to build something from scratch using a framework like CakePHP. I tried CakePHP and found it even more complicated than Elgg.
It is difficult to query the database due to the entity-based relationship model. You should use the build-in methods for accessing data. However, I have written many queries to double check on what is actually stored in the database.
You cannot change layouts using CSS alone. You have to deal with the various Elgg views. But CakePHP uses the same Model/View/Controller MVC concept so that would be just as difficult.
Related
I've been trying to both convert old code and write new code using GetScopedService().
However, I keep discovering ones I didn't know about.
Is there an easy way to find the complete list of services available for 2sxc? For DNN? And maybe even RazorBlade?
If they are not documented somewhere, is there a page of code in the public repositories that I could bookmark where it would be easy to see (and compile) a list of them?
Your best place to start is https://r.2sxc.org/services (which goes to https://docs.2sxc.org/api/dot-net/ToSic.Sxc.Services.html)
This is where we keep all the current services published. Other services are to be seen as exotic / rare use.
Razor-Blade is still mostly non-service, but we plan to fix that.
We're just about to release ServiceKits as a feature, which would make things even more intuitive. For example, ServiceKit14 has all commonly used services on it, and also IScrub from Razor Blade.
I have been using both in my projects and sometimes I find the need to use a Material UI component within a bootstrap component and the UI displays as I would expect. I have been advised though not to use this approach. Is there any reason why since both are using the grid and can be flexed?
I tend to be verbose so I'll put the concise answer up top here:
Conclusion:
Whoever said it was bad to use both might just be expressing their
opinion, in reality saying it's bad to use both really lacks context
in what you're designing. #user3770494 made a very good point- but the
point, while valid and truthy about the build size, it does depend on
the scope of the application. If it's an intraoffice application with
everyone on a fiber network local it'd all be cached in memory
anyways... but (not that you know me) I would not judge you negatively
if you mixed them together-- unless it was for a MAJOR million user
application to run on mobile (an very low devices), desktop, and other
devices around the world requiring real(ish) time updates, and
streaming dynamic content with 10000s of active users at any givin
time 24/7.
In all truth- if it's not life or death-- I'd say use both- and also
do your own. The experience of understanding more then one thing is
better then just "committing to a single solution" for personal
growth.
The rest of this reading is optional - you're welcome :)
I personally have used both in production applications (both together, and independently)... I've also done it all from scratch... (CSS is my least favorite part of job things I do - luckily I have a coworker who is great at it) Here are my thoughts:
Warning: I tend to be verbose.
Disclaimer:
As someone who likes function over form, form is an afterthought that is nit picky for clients to ask about tenuous little changes. I am going to try to leave my opinion on "how each option looks for feels" out of this as much as I can.
Also I'm looking at your question in a current choice I'm making- which is using ReactJS / create-react-app to make "demo" projects for touch screen embeaded systems- so I am going to roll out half a dozen mock programs for demos nothing that really does anytihng exactly (CCscanner, barcode scanner, gps, webcam integration, fun stuff like that). So I'm researching what will be easist for me to just commit to for this "beacuse I'm bored and got a pi3b+board for fun).
Answer:
If you have the time, dedication and resources, there is really
nothing wrong with mixing them together. But you just need to think
about the time/cost/benifit of it. DIY to make the end user happy-
even if you mix them. Totally yourself is remaking the wheel- but you
can always pull in boostrap styles etc.
The inherent risks is that if you use both- make sure you don't "Mix them" to much- because then you will always have issues with trying
to ever do version changes on either one.
I like a lot of MaterialUIs things, but I honestly dislike how a few things look (style wise by default)- functionally I like it better
then bootstrap, but at the same time, I do not like MaterialUIs React
programming style (as a purist who hates CSS But knows how important
it is- having to use !important ever ever ever ... is big big big
nonononononononon) compared to whatever way my coworkers and I use
for conventions. Not saying it's better or worse then my own
preference- but a few things about it really irk me (even if they are
done for good reasons).
Bootstrap has a lot of choices to use for- I like how it looks better, I like how it plays with ReactJS better- but there is
reactstrap vs. react-bootstrap (which is why I found your post trying
to figure which one to use for this demo thing I'm doing).
Most recently (for production projects) I do try to stick just with one but normally I'm making systems that are function over form. So
they don't really care that much about the UI elements, it's about
how to use it not make it pretty. So I stick with using a single one
just to make my job easier- and usally still override styles myself
... if the original styles piss me off. But I do not stick with one
because "It's bad form to use both" I just stick with one for that
reason mentioned above. I'd actually say if bandwidth is not an
issue- it's quality to use both- but only use the parts of them that
you actually use.
(I noticed someone once importing full jQuery when the only thing that they used from it was $.ajax (all be it a lot but still) ... I was like... is that not overkill?!) -- So if you use both and want to keep things slim- just make sure on compilation you're only importing what you're using. Pythonically I'm saying- never use import * from module (however you express that in Javascript as a concept - webpack/gulp/whomever should take care of most of that for you). Assuming you're using ES6/7 style Javascript.
I encountered this scenario recently and opted to use both but for specific tasks. With it being a responsive web app Bootstrap made the most sense to use for the layout and Material UI for the widgets (just my personal preference).
You can definitely use both but you should be aware of the following:
There will be a lot of overlap in offered features unless you take time and effort to manage it by carefully picking elements from each of those libraries. And even then you will face situations where you can't avoid overlap. This basically results in a bigger bundle.
You will have to maintain theming variables for both systems to have a consistent presentation across your app. Even then, there will be situations like where your table checkboxes look different from your form checkboxes because they are from different libraries.
You have to learn and understand both of the systems. It means sometimes it'll be harder to find what's causing a certain bug. You'll also be spending more time deciding which library to use for which component.
Overall, it's more work for you to work with two different systems and a higher chance of things looking inconsistent. That said, mixing in things like a grid system with limited theming might not be too bad.
If possible, I highly encourage you to choose one system and stick with it.
Using both will increase your production js size.
Material Ui and bootstrap both provide components with basic styles like buttons so choose one.
You can use bootsrap grid for structure only or even go with flex.
Is there any way to auto-generate Swagger documentation (or similar) for a Nancy service?
I found Nancy.Swagger, but there's no information on how to use it and the demo application doesn't seem to demonstrate generating documentation (if it does, it's not obvious).
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
In my current project I've been looking a lot into this problem. I used both nancy.swagger and nancy.swagger.attributes.
I quickly discarded Nancy.swagger, because for me personally it doesn't sound right that you have to create a pure documentation class for each nancy module. The attributes solution was a bit "cleaner" - at least codebase and documentation were in one place. But very fast this became unmaintainable. Module code is unreadable because of many attributes. Nothing is generated automatically: you have to put path, all parameters, even http method as an attribute. This is a huge effort duplication. Problems came very fast, a few examples:
I changed POST to PUT in Nancy and forgot to update [Method] attribute.
I added a parameter but not the attribute for it.
I changed parameter from path to query and didn't update the attribute.
It's too easy to forget to update the attributes (let alone documentation module solution), which leads to discrepancies between your documentation and actual code base. Our UI team is in another country and they had some trouble using the APIs because docu just wasn't up-to-date.
My solution? Don't mix code and documentation. Generating docu from code (like Swashbuckle does) IS ok, but actually writing docu in code and try to dublicate the code in docu is NOT. It's not better than writing it in a Word document for your clients.
If you want Swagger docu, just do it the Swagger way.
- Spend some time with Swagger.Editor and really author your API in
YAML. It looks all-text and hard, but once you get used to it, it's
not.
- Spend some time with Swagger.Codegen and adapt it (it already does a fair job for generating Nancy server code and with a few
adjustments to moustache templates it was just what I needed).
- Automate your process: write a couple of batches to generate your modules and models from yaml and copy them to your repository.
Benefits? Quite a few:
-
Your YAML definition is now the single truth of your REST contract.
If somewhere something is defferent, it's wrong.
Nancy server code is auto-generated
Client code-bases are auto-generated (in our case it's android, ios and angular)
So whenever I change something in REST contract, all codebases are regenerated and added to projects in one batch. I just have to tell the teams something was updated. They don't have to look through some documents and search for it. They just have their code regenerated and probably see some compile errors, in case of breaking changes.
Do I still use nancy.swagger(.annotations)?
Yes, I do use it in another project, which has just one endpoint with a couple of methods. They don't change often. It's not worth the effort to set up everything, I have my swagger docu fast up and running. But if your project is big, API is changing, and you have multiple code-bases depending on your API, my advice is to invest some time into a real swagger setup.
I am quoting the author answer here from https://github.com/khellang/Nancy.Swagger/issues/59
The installation should be really simple, just pull down the NuGet package, add metadata modules to describe your routes, and hit /api-docs. That should get you the JSON. If you want to add swagger-ui as well, you have to add that manually right now.
No. Not in an automated. https://github.com/yahehe/Nancy.Swagger needs lots of manually created metadata.
There is a nice article here: http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/article/generating-api-document-in-nancy-using-swagger/
Looks like you still have to add swagger-ui separately.
Thanks in advance for any help offered and patience for my current web-coding experience.
Background:
I'm currently attempting to develop an web based application for my family's business. There is a current version of this system I have developed in C#, however I want to get the system web-based and in the process learn cakephp and the MVC pattern.
Current problem:
I'm currently stuck in a controller that's supposed to take care of a PurchaseTicket. This ticket will have an associated customer, line items, totals etc. I've been trying to develop a basic 'add()' function to the controller however I'm having trouble with the following:
I'm creating a view with everything on it: a button for searching customer, a button to add line items, and a save button. Since I'm used to developing desktop applications, I'm thinking that I might be trying to transfer the same logic to web-based. Is this something that would be recommended or do'able?
I'm running into basic problems like 'searching customer'. From the New Ticket page I'm redirecting to the customer controller, searching and then putting result in session variable or posting it back, but as I continue my process with the rest of the required information, I'm ending up with a bit of "spaghetti" code. Should I do a multi part form? If I do I break the visual design of the application.
Right now I ended up instantiating my PurchaseTicket model and putting it in a session variable. I did this to save intermediate data however I'm not sure if instantiating a Model is conforming to cakephp standards or MVC pattern.
I apologize for the length, this is my first post as a member.
Thanks!
Welcome to Stack Overflow!
So it sounds like there's a few questions, all with pretty open-ended answers. I don't know if this will end up an answer as such, but it's more information than I could put in a comment, so here I go:
First and foremost, if you haven't already, I'd recommend doing the CakePHP Blog Tutorial to get familiar with Cake, before diving straight into a conversion of your existing desktop app.
Second, get familiar with CakePHP's bake console. It will save you a LOT of time if you use it to get started on the web version of your app.
I can't stress how important it is to get a decent grasp of MVC and CakePHP on a small project before trying to tackle something substantial.
Third, the UI for web apps is definitely different to desktop apps. In the case of CakePHP, nothing is 'running' permanently on the server. The entire CakePHP framework gets instantiated, and dies, with every single page request to the server. That can be a tricky concept when transitioning from desktop apps, where everything is stored in memory, and instances of objects can exist for as long as you want them to. With desktop apps, it's easier to have a user go and do another task (like searching for a customer), and then send the result back to the calling object, the instance of which will still exist. As you've found out, if you try and mimic this functionality in a web app by storing too much information in sessions, you'll quickly end up with spaghetti code.
You can use AJAX (google it if you don't already know about it) to update parts of a page only, and get a more streamlined UI, which it sounds like something you'll be needing to do. To get a general idea of the possibilities, you might want to take a look at Bamboo Invoice. It's not built with CakePHP, but it's built with CodeIgniter, which is another open source PHP MVC framework. It sounds like Bamboo Invoice has quite a few similar functionalities to what you're describing (an Invoice has line items, totals, a customer, etc), so it might help you to get an idea of how you should structure your interface - and if you want to dig into the source code, how you can achieve some of the things you want to do.
Bamboo Invoice uses Ajax to give the app a feel of 'one view with everything on it', which it sounds like you want.
Fourth, regarding the specific case of your Customer Search situation, storing stuff in a session variable probably isn't the way to go. You may well want to use an autocomplete field, which sends an Ajax request to server after each time a character is entered in the field, and displays the list list of suggestions / matching customers that the server sends back. See an example here: http://jqueryui.com/autocomplete/. Implementing an autocomplete isn't totally straight forward, but there should be plenty of examples and tutorials all over the web.
Lastly, I obviously don't know what your business does, but have you looked into existing software that might work for you, before building your own? There's a lot of great, flexible web-based solutions, at very reasonable prices, for a LOT of the common tasks that businesses have. There might be something that gives you great results for much less time and money than it costs to build your own solution.
Either way, good luck, and enjoy CakePHP!
In order to avoid this to be a 'personal question', I would like to know if there are any technical disadvantages to using the $scaffold var when you're in production 'mode'.
The documentation says that it's not advised because it's not flexible enough. However it still works, also when debug level is 0.
I have some models/tables that are quite simple and will do perfectly with the default scaffolding options.. so are there any real reasons to not use scaffolding in production?
It depends on the application. If you do not care that every user has CRUD access, then feel free. Especially if it is an internal app where you have more control over users versus an open public app.
Then if you need to start making alterations, you can simply BAKE the code and start modifying. Easy peasy.