# Current status of facets branch **URL:** \ **Category:** Radiant CMS\ **Created:** [August 13, 2007, 11:10am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911 "2007-08-13T11:10:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2007, 11:10am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/1 "2007-08-13T11:10:25Z")
Hey all, After almost finishing my own extension of the page editing section of radiant, I’ve just discovered the facets branch. Does anyone know the current status and it it is likely to be merged with trunk any time soon? I see Sean created it back in Feb and development sped along until a few months ago. I’ve got a small arsenal of extensions I need for my own purposes to get my site off the ground that I’d love to share with the world, but would prefer if they worked with the trunk version and not a branch if only for the sake of trying to save myself headache in supporting people. Thanks, Glenn ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2007, 3:28pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/2 "2007-08-13T15:28:06Z")
Glenn, Facets is definitely “experimental”. From time to time since I created it, people have asked when it will be merged back, but the only answer I can give is “when it’s ready”. The branch was mostly a proof-of-concept and is not ready for production. There are many things I’d like to rewrite or rethink about it, and I’d like to expand its scope to include the other interfaces as well. That’s a big task and it will take a while to complete. You are welcome to use it, but it will probably not stay in step with trunk or the other branches until one of us has serious time to work on it. That said, I’d gladly accept patches for it if you would like to contribute. Sean ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2007, 5:17pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/3 "2007-08-15T17:17:02Z")
> -----Original Message----- > From: Sean C. > Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 9:26 AM > Subject: Re: [Radiant] Current status of facets branch > > Facets is definitely “experimental”. I see there’s a “facets-lite” in the mental branch: - how stable is it? - could it be extended into the more complete facets system or would it have to be rewritten? - how far is the mental branch from merged into trunk? Having this functionality, even a subset of the grander plan, would IMHO do wonders for extension development. I’ve just set up one site using Radiant and would like to use it more, but currently see the lack of facets as a stumbling block. If someone could give me a status update I could take a look at it? Thanks. Damien McKenna Web D. The LIMU Company ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2007, 6:02pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/4 "2007-08-15T18:02:07Z")
Damien, > I see there’s a “facets-lite” in the mental branch: > > - how stable is it? It’s pretty stable, actually. That’s mostly because it’s trivial – you can only add to the meta area and the area above the buttons. I don’t see it persisting however, once we get more flexibility. > - could it be extended into the more complete facets system or would it > have to be rewritten? There are a number of design flaws in facets that need to be alleviated, and in my opinion, it might be easier to rewrite. ‘facets-lite’ was just a nickname because I wanted to enable things like page\_attachments without the full-blown hyper-extensible model of facets. > - how far is the mental branch from merged into trunk? mental became 0.6.0, if you look at the changelogs. > Having this functionality, even a subset of the grander plan, would IMHO > do wonders for extension development. I’ve just set up one site using > Radiant and would like to use it more, but currently see the lack of > facets as a stumbling block. What specific sections of the interface do you want to modify? Until I get time to work on facets, the least we could do is put some more flexibility in trunk if the request is reasonable, well thought out and tested. Of course, you can always just copy the current UI and modify it to fit your needs in an extension. If you have other extensions that do the same, however, this could be sticky – see the recent discussions about reorder/CopyMove. As always, patches are welcome. Since it is open source, you are also welcome to modify the codebase yourself. Cheers, Sean ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2007, 6:47pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/5 "2007-08-15T18:47:12Z")
Damien McKenna wrote: > So the facets-lite wasn’t for the pages view? I just found it by > searching trac for “facets”. Facets-lite was only for the page _editing_ interface, not the main sitemap view. > What were the original goals of the project? How were you intending it > would work? What do you now want to change on it? If you could explain > this we might be able to help steer it in the right direction? The original goals of the facets branch were to compartmentalize parts of the page-editing interface so that they could be more easily and unobtrusively modified. It operates on the principle that view templates and partials define ‘regions’ that are filled with other partials at render-time. You can define the contents of the regions via the ‘admin’ object. The sample extension does a good job of showing how to use the object. There are some quirks to the interface, however, and I’m not sure it’s in the right place of the API/application. Right now I don’t have a clear answer on what I would want to change, but my general feeling is that some things aren’t quite right. I’d have to spend some time re-reading the code to see what needs fixing. > I was thinking a simply way to add an action column to the Pages list > would be an ample start to any grander plans, that would allow us to > start making extensions behave nicely. This is one area in which facets needed to expand. It also needed to cover the layout and snippets interfaces as well. > I’d like to be able to have the ReOrder and CopyMove extensions on the > same page, playing nicely. I can rework the extensions to suit, but > it’s tweaking the core I’m nervous about. > > If you could document what you’d like Facets to do we could try to work > towards that goal? > Yes, but I prefer not creating more work for myself - when v0.6.5 or 0.7 > rolls out with a replacement I’ll have wasted time getting. > > Yes. As mentioned though if I’m going to help I’d like to at least be > working in the same direction as the main project, so my efforts don’t > go to waste. Unfortunately, facets has become kind of the cold-fusion-Perl-6-Duke-Nukem-Forever of the Radiant project. I agree that the functionality is sorely needed; extensions that step on each other are a real problem. Unless it becomes stable and mature, it won’t be merged into any other branches or trunk before 0.6.5 or 0.7. However, if you would like to contribute, I’d say first familiarize yourself with the codebase and especially the tests. Then, checkout facets and create a diff between it and trunk, then merge the changes into your facets checkout. Once you have that, go after the most accessible part of the code that you’d like to change. Write tests, verify your changes. Submit a patch to the Trac. Since it’s an experimental branch, if your patch looks good, I’ll be sure to accept and apply it (once I find a minute… typing this email took a while too!). Sean ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2007, 6:17pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/6 "2007-08-15T18:17:08Z")
> trivial – you can only add to the meta area and the area above > the buttons. I don’t see it persisting however, once we get more > flexibility. (and later) > ‘facets-lite’ was just a nickname because I wanted to enable things > like page\_attachments without the full-blown hyper-extensible model > of facets. So the facets-lite wasn’t for the pages view? I just found it by searching trac for “facets”. > > - could it be extended into the more complete facets system > > or would it have to be rewritten? > > There are a number of design flaws in facets that need to be > alleviated, and in my opinion, it might be easier to rewrite. What were the original goals of the project? How were you intending it would work? What do you now want to change on it? If you could explain this we might be able to help steer it in the right direction? I was thinking a simply way to add an action column to the Pages list would be an ample start to any grander plans, that would allow us to start making extensions behave nicely. > > - how far is the mental branch from merged into trunk? > > mental became 0.6.0, if you look at the changelogs. Mea culpa, I forgot that. > What specific sections of the interface do you want to modify? I’d like to be able to have the ReOrder and CopyMove extensions on the same page, playing nicely. I can rework the extensions to suit, but it’s tweaking the core I’m nervous about. > Until I get time to work on facets, the least we could do is put > some more flexibility in trunk if the request is reasonable, well > thought out and tested. If you could document what you’d like Facets to do we could try to work towards that goal? > Of course, you can always just copy the current UI and modify it > to fit your needs in an extension. Yes, but I prefer not creating more work for myself - when v0.6.5 or 0.7 rolls out with a replacement I’ll have wasted time getting. > If you have other extensions that do the same, however, this could > be sticky – see the recent discussions about reorder/CopyMove. Exactly, I started that thread 🙂 > As always, patches are welcome. Since it is open source, you > are also welcome to modify the codebase yourself. Yes. As mentioned though if I’m going to help I’d like to at least be working in the same direction as the main project, so my efforts don’t go to waste. Damien ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 3:55am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/7 "2007-08-20T03:55:29Z")
These things never come across well over email. On Aug 19, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Jacob B. wrote: > My take is, the Core team isn’t ready to seriously review patches > and find a > solution. They’re procrastinating on the problem. To say that the core team is procrastinating is a huge assumption on your part. As far as I am aware, no one has stepped up to bankroll the Core, so its more likely that they are busy with their personal lives or even gainful employment. > Do you see what I’m getting at? No disrespect to the core team, I > think > they are doing a great job maintaining a solid stable product. It is disingenuous to say that you think that they are doing a great job after you accuse them of procrastination. You may have no intention of being disrespectful, but it sure reads like it over email. I just wanted to try to put out any fires before they get too big. Email is not a good medium for nuance. -Jim ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 4:01am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/8 "2007-08-20T04:01:29Z")
Jacob B. wrote: > I too have tried to contribute to the expansion, improvement, and > re-integration of facets… twice now Really? Did you announce your updates here on the mailing list? If we miss something on trac, making a little noise about it here is helpful. What ticket are we talking about? – John L. [http://wiseheartdesign.com](http://wiseheartdesign.com) ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 2:53am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/9 "2007-08-20T02:53:25Z")
I too have tried to contribute to the expansion, improvement, and re-integration of facets… twice now My take is, the Core team isn’t ready to seriously review patches and find a solution. They’re procrastinating on the problem. I think if I were to try a third time I would simply write a plugin that duplicates all of the code of the current admin interface and then adds the needed ‘facets-like’ modularity. It’s really a hack and not the way it should be done long term, but the power of Ruby makes it possible. Once you write that ‘base-facets’ plugin and written a bunch of plugins on top of that… My theory is that you can more easily test the market for your facets-requiring plug-ins. If mainstream users of radiant can benefit from your admin-interface-changing plugin they are more likely to go through the effort of installing it and using it and giving honest useful feedback if they can simply install a set of extensions on their existing radiant installation (as opposed to having to download an old branch) THEN finally the core team will Know what they actually want the ‘facets-like’ functionality of the core radiant to be and properly address it. Do you see what I’m getting at? No disrespect to the core team, I think they are doing a great job maintaining a solid stable product. But if you want to experiment, build a plugin so everybody can install it onto their existing radiant. Once it’s really popular, then the core team will accept your patch to make it possible “The right way”. And then I’ll be able to port my extensions… : ) ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 4:35pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/10 "2007-08-20T16:35:19Z")
So maybe “procrastinating” isn’t the best word I first released this: [http://dev.eyebeam.org/projects/radiant-partatts/wiki](http://dev.eyebeam.org/projects/radiant-partatts/wiki) then this: [http://dev.radiantcms.org/radiant/ticket/508](http://dev.radiantcms.org/radiant/ticket/508) There’s even this, demonstrating why I think we need facets-like modularity: [http://demo.kupenda.org/](http://demo.kupenda.org/) and [http://demo.kupenda.org/admin/](http://demo.kupenda.org/admin/) (login: demo, password: radiant) This is not a trivial problem. We’re talking about significant change to the inner workings of radiant to add a complete layer of view abstraction. This isn’t something that is going to be submitted as a single patch, approved and just work. We need to weight in on all the possibilities and explore the benefits and drawbacks to each. So that’s why I say, make some plugins. ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 6:37pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/11 "2007-08-20T18:37:47Z")
my reason for needing modularity: [Re-Introducing: Page Attributes, Templates, ContentFromTempl - Radiant CMS - Ruby-Forum](http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/110943) ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 5:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/12 "2007-08-20T17:30:39Z")
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jacob B. > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 10:34 AM > Subject: Re: [Radiant] Current status of facets branch > > This is not a trivial problem. We’re talking about significant > change to the inner workings of radiant to add a complete layer > of view abstraction. You’ll have to pardon my naivity, but please help me understand why the current system couldn’t be extended in two “simple” directions to allow for what should cover most people’s needs: - Model to cover adding features to the list pages, i.e. the main Pages, Snippets and Layouts views, e.g. the existing ReOrder and CopyMove extensions. - Model to cover adding features to the editor pages, i.e. editing pages, snippets and layouts. Maybe let it select which internal function to allow the enhancement to show on. Then in a subsequent itteration DRY it up. IMHO (not having read the source code so I could be complete off-base) this could be done over the course of three public beta releases: - 0.6.7-unstable gets the lists model, - 0.6.8-unstable gets the editor model, - 0.6.9-unstable gets some cleanup, and after further testing & fixing (and time for the extensions to be updated) it is launched as 0.7.0-stable. Thoughts? Damien McKenna Web D. The LIMU Company ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 6:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/13 "2007-08-20T18:41:47Z")
Roger. – Travis B. removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 5:55pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/14 "2007-08-20T17:55:41Z")
Hey guys, Please excuse my naivety here, but what are the benefits to having “facets-like modularity”? Thanks, – Travis B. removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid ---
**Author:** ![glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@glenngore](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/glenngore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 7:16pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/current-status-of-facets-branch/111911/15 "2007-08-20T19:16:51Z")
> - Model to cover adding features to the list pages, i.e. the main Pages, > Snippets and Layouts views, e.g. the existing ReOrder and CopyMove > extensions. > > - Model to cover adding features to the editor pages, i.e. editing > pages, snippets and layouts. Maybe let it select which internal > function to allow the enhancement to show on. This sounds good on a high level, but how do you go about actually implementing it? Is this a singleton model? one object covers the “page editing interface” and you manipulate that object to change that interface? Or, can you instantiate new page editing interfaces How does this “Model to cover adding features to the editor pages” provide hooks into extensions. If I were to create a “calendar” extension for instance, I would want it to be page type. And when you select calendar as a page type I should see a different page editing interface. And when you click save, there needs to be certain callbacks to my extension. How should all of this work… it’s not clear.