No Bridge for Joomla 1.5

Started by BarryBarry, January 02, 2007, 06:56:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

BarryBarry

In reaction on the post by Orstio;
No Bridge for Joomla 1.5

This is a SAD SAD situation, certainly since all SMF / Joomla users will be in a position where decisions have to be made, resulting in an or - or solution.

Personally I just made the step to leave PHPBB behind, because the integration between Joomla and PHPBB are very poor (bad). (this decision was made some months ago, and now we just made the step, this announcement is a slap in the face for me  :'( )
SMF has a lot to offer, amongst many great features, the joomla bridge is one of them!

Is it possible to share your experience thus far, so we can pick this up and try to find a solution anyway?
Joomla 1.5 should be a CMS which gives handles for usermanagement... loosing SMF is a step back.

I'd like to give it a go, since loosing SMF isn't on my schedule since I've expierenced SMF!

Please let us know where the problem exactly lies, so we can try to find the solution, regards GT

(edit: i saw the url wasn't working)

klaas2

Quote from: GTWillemsen on January 02, 2007, 06:56:19 AM
Personally I just made the step to leave PHPBB behind, because the integration between Joomla and PHPBB are very poor (bad). (this decision was made some months ago, and now we just made the step, this announcement is a slap in the face for me  :'( )
Same here.

What would be the best solution when the joomla/smf combo becomes obsolete, change back to mambo?

BarryBarry

Personally I do not want to switch again, instead I want first want to try to realize it anyway.

kdizzle

As I saw this developing I went ahead and unwrapped my SMF and removed the bridge.  My main use on my site is simple calenders for my classes and some content.  I find SMF to be the best forum so I wanted to keep it. 

I simply made my joomla site have a login page for me and other admins and the rest is all guest user.  That way My SMF forum is still kickass. 

A huge Thank you to Kindred, Ortisio and all the other people who helped me with the bridge over the years!

shirster

I feel the pain... now I need to decide whether I should make my smf install a stand alone or hack the core when Joomla 1.5 is out...  :'( :'(
freelance designer and full time day dreamer

Kindred

personally, I am planning to move back to Mambo...

mambo 4.6.1 is very nice and the intergration hooks are fairly amazing.
Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

elfishtroll

I suspect that there is more to this than meets the eye.

Probably some personal rift between SMF people and Joomla people rather than any technical difficulty as its only PHP code afterall, not BRAIN SURGERY. :(

I dont even get the part where he sez "a proper bridge" does not modify core files..what does that mean anyway????

who cares what it's called, as long as it works? The Ortiso bridge modifies the code internally, by performing manipulations on the internal string buffer.
The JoomlaHacks bridge well...as the name implies, hacks away at the code like Cortez hacking trough the rainforest. But they both work, and to the user, the result is more or less seamless.

This is all a bit premature anyway. I wouldnt worry too much.

Running SMF unbridged is probably best anyway, we dont need to 'bridge it' to 'wrap it' which is what people are really trying to do anyway.

The market is gonna be big enough that SOMEBODY is gonna provide a solution. :D

klaas2

Quote from: shirster on January 02, 2007, 04:23:29 PM
I feel the pain... now I need to decide whether I should make my smf install a stand alone or hack the core when Joomla 1.5 is out...  :'( :'(
Altering core files doesn't sound like a good idea since it will only work until the next update of either joomla or smf.

Quote from: elfishtroll on January 02, 2007, 04:45:50 PM
Running SMF unbridged is probably best anyway, we dont need to 'bridge it' to 'wrap it' which is what people are really trying to do anyway.
That depends on whether you use the joomla login functions.
I am also using the comment component and a shout box on my site and I don't want to enable random guests to use those. Therefore I need some kind of bridge between my CMS and my forum because otherwise users would have to register twice.

Quote from: Kindred on January 02, 2007, 04:42:11 PM
personally, I am planning to move back to Mambo...

mambo 4.6.1 is very nice and the intergration hooks are fairly amazing.
Maybe that's the best solution afterall.

Kindred

Elfishtroll...

You are distinctly incorrect on almost all counts.

1- there is no rift between sfma dn joomla people.   Joomla has decided to move in a coding direction that does not work with the way SMF works. Exactly as orstio described.

2- A proper bridge does not modify any source files, again, exactly as Orstio said. As good as the Joomlahacks integration might be, it is not a proper bridge and, since it does modify both SMF and Joomla source files, upgrading either system can be an issue...  as can some interactions between other smf mods or joomla components.
Orstio's bridge is a bridge...   it works with the basic source codes of both systems and links the two together through its own functions, without modifying any of the actual code.

3- It's not premature. The Joomla Dev team has released the betas of 1.5. The SMF bridge does not work with Joomla 1.5. period.

4- Running SMF in the joomla "wrapper" component is a sure way to disaster. SMF does not like to be run in an iframe and there are probable session issues with doing so. In addition, MOST people actually use the bridge to link the userlists and permissions of SMF and Joomla together. The wrapping is a nice benefit as well, but the shared users and single login is definitely the most important feature....   Just like the Gallery2 bridge does.

5- I (and most others) don't want to run unbridged or unwrapped...

And so... although I have absolutely no issues with the Joomla team, and I like Joomla, I will be switching my sites to Mambo when the mambo bridge reaches release status. Because the MAIN purpose of my site is the forum and I refuse to use anything other than SMF.
Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Aravot

Problem with Mambo is the lack of add-ons, most developers are supporting Joomla only, if Mambo related questions are posted on developers forum you'll be ignored or you'll get "We support Joomla" answer.

I won't be switching to Mambo, I only hope Orstio or Joomla core team are able to find a solution otherwise I'll miss this message board (I don't mean SMF I won't be switching SMF for anything).

elfishtroll

QuoteAltering core files doesn't sound like a good idea since it will only work until the next update of either joomla or smf.

All bridges are potentially affected when a new version of SMF or Joomla comes out - it all depends on what those changes are.

We've all seen the bridge (either types) get updated in response to changes in Joomla or SMF (depending on  the scope of those changes)

Wrapping the bridge in an Iframe (raw) does make it harder to implicitly bookmark your current location in the forum, but it's nothing a little Javascript and php cant solve!

The Orsito bridge or the Joomlahacks bridge weren't perfect initially either! Indeed, I was hacked due to a vulnerability in the Oristo bridge :( But in time, they were all fixed and now work pretty much perfectly!

I dont see how the only people to put a man on the moon cant connect two PHP apps together. It all seems ludicrous and somewhat peevish to me.

As far as 'modifying source files', SMF mods do that ALL the time via the package manager! why is that set up as some kind of sacred cow or mystical line in the sand we dare not cross?

All we need for SMF is a J1.5 integration mod for the SMF side, and maybe some custom modifications for the Joomla side. For those who are concerned about future changes in J1.5 invalidating the new bridge, we do the same as we now do for SMF. Roll back our mods, apply the update and then reapply the mods.


On a related note, I feel SMF should have a director of Public Relations  or some kind of functional organ to issue press releases or official SMF statements. I'm not saying this unkindly, its just that the announcement (no bridge support) could have been handled much differently.

If original announcement simply said:
Quote
As a matter of programming resources, SMF does not currently have any to spare regarding the new version of Joomla. The internal code of the new Joomla is more akin to a completely new CMS than an incremental difference compared to the old versions of Joomla and Mambo.

The SSI.php functions and the resources of the Online Manual and API reference will still be available to those who wish to add their own bridging functions.
Since the Mambo code base (now currently very similar to the joomla code base) will not change appreciably in the near future, we will be able to continue to support Mambo as it progresses.

That would be it. Done.

No editorial comments as to what constitutes a 'proper bridge' or other  "but I work on bridges, not modifications of CMS's."
WT??
Just a simple statement of intent as it relates to resources.
The statement from Orsito justs seems petulant and peevish to me, it doesnt 'speak' well at all.

I was very disappointed reading it, no so much for the result (no future bridge) but the way it was written.

Kindred

and yet, if the statement had been made the way you say, there would ahve been all sorts of people saying 'awwwww, why not'.   Orstio's comment addressed the issue, was straightforward and to the point and it also explained WHY he would not be working on a j1.5 bridge any further. Sorry if it was not "PC" or "corp-speak" enough for you.

Remember, everyone here at SMF is a volunteer.


Wrapping the foroum in an iframe has more issues than just bookmarks.

And the reason j1.5 is not going to be supported is because the Joomla team has changed the very way that Joomla handles things. Without a fairly major re-write to the way SMF handles things, the systems won't bridge. (remember, any changes to the joomla side of things would have to be made such that everyone else's components, designed for the new way that j! is going to work, won't break either...  It's more than a little mod-package for the smf side of things, it would require a change to the very way that smf works.


Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Orstio

Thanks for your sentiments here, Elfishtroll.  Believe it or not, they are appreciated.

QuoteAs far as 'modifying source files', SMF mods do that ALL the time via the package manager! why is that set up as some kind of sacred cow or mystical line in the sand we dare not cross?

That has to do with history.  It's important to learn from the past.

There was an integration created for Mambo 4.5.0 before I ever started on the bridge.  You can read about it here:

http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=6344.0

That integration modified both Mambo and SMF, and development cycles of both softwares were significantly shorter at that time.  SMF 1.0 was still in beta at the time (SMF 1.0 beta 3, IIRC), and Mambo 4.5.0 was pre-ACL.  Upgrading to either Mambo 4.5.1 or SMF 1.0 RC1 broke the integration, and the source modifications did not work with either new version.

The developer of that software seemed to disappear around that time, so I started working on an integration of my own. I contacted the lead dev here ([Unknown] at that time), to let him know about my intentions, and the "ideal" system I envisioned.

I already knew that Coppermine had a built-in series of bridges -- integrations that required no modification to the Coppermine source code, and that seemed the right way to go.

If you've followed the development of the bridge over the years, you'd know that it has made fewer and smaller changes to SMF and Mambo/Joomla as it progressed.  Now, it's down to a small change (one line) to the Joomla template if you happen to be running SMF and Joomla in separate databases.  

So, I hope that explains at least why I feel it paramount that no changes be made to core files.  I've seen the mess that makes, and so it's something that I choose not to do.

QuoteOn a related note, I feel SMF should have a director of Public Relations  or some kind of functional organ to issue press releases or official SMF statements. I'm not saying this unkindly, its just that the announcement (no bridge support) could have been handled much differently.

If original announcement simply said:

Insert Quote
As a matter of programming resources, SMF does not currently have any to spare regarding the new version of Joomla. The internal code of the new Joomla is more akin to a completely new CMS than an incremental difference compared to the old versions of Joomla and Mambo.

The SSI.php functions and the resources of the Online Manual and API reference will still be available to those who wish to add their own bridging functions.
Since the Mambo code base (now currently very similar to the joomla code base) will not change appreciably in the near future, we will be able to continue to support Mambo as it progresses.

While that sounds good, a lot of it is untrue.

I could rephrase your version to state the truth, and I suppose I could have mentioned more than Mambo, in retrospect, but at the time I was thinking that Joomla users would be most familiar with that CMS, and I wanted to make sure that those already using Mambo would be certain that development for it would continue.

QuoteThe internal code of the new Joomla is more akin to a completely new CMS than an incremental difference compared to the old versions of Joomla and Mambo.  The new structure of Joomla, and the structure of SMF, will not integrate without significant modifications to the core of one or both of the softwares, which is a situation we do not wish to pursue.

The SSI.php functions and the resources of the Online Manual and API reference will still be available to those who wish to add their own bridging functions.

Since the Mambo code base has also changed appreciably, but in such a way as to make integration easier, we will be able to continue to support Mambo as it progresses.  Support and development for other CMS software will continue as well, including Xoops, e107, and iGamingCMS.  We look forward to adding more CMS bridges in the future.

exrace

In the end all people want is a working solution. 
When I first read the "No Bridge" post it rubbed me the wrong way.  I guess the big rub was the "mambo" statement - it almost sounded like a dis to Joomla.  >:(

I have used both "bridges" available for Joomla and I am currently using the other "hack".  Yes it has issues but it works fine once you work out the problems.

I will wait and see how 1.5 changes as it gets closer to release as I am sure someone will have a working solution for Joomla 1.5 and our favorite forum software SMF.  I won't be afraid to roll up the sleeves and do some coding to make it work. :)




IVIIVI4ck3y27

I have to be perfectly honest that I'm beginning, reluctantly, to wonder about either direction.  I'm not keen on Mambo anymore because of the fact that the entire dev team pretty much left and there's been little if any progress that I'm happy or keen with.  I much prefer Joomla and the progress the team is on...  but I do have to wonder if the move from 1.0 to 1.5 and later 2.0 is going to be an endless sea of breakages as they make major milestone revisions to get to adding the template system, better SEF out of the box, better multi-national language support, and then work towards a more robust and feature-rich user system.  I do *FULLY* understand the needs the Joomla team has noted need to be addressed, maybe similar needs to what SMF will need to address as well, but I almost feel like we could've rode out 1.x 'til 2.0 and made it all in one big swing, rather than make monumental changes multiple times that have greater potential to break bridges and other modules and components multiple times.  Just keep 1.x working solidly.  It might not be the leader forever, might not even be to some now... but if they devoted their energies to 2.0 to get everything progressed along...  maybe once there was confidence that this is Joomla at 2.0, this is the new API framework, have at integrating SMF via a bridge...  there'd be more receptiveness towards it rather than the skepticism that major changes are going to leave the efforts for naught too much, too often.

What I'd love to see is rather than both sides to continue to reinvent the wheel in their own ways, for the 2 sides to possibly come together and find a way to make SMF extend Joomla and Joomla to extend SMF when combined (but worth work very well independantly on their own); rather than exist solely as 2 separate apps. that require funky bridges and patches.  It should be a lot easier than this and shouldn't require multiple different people to create different workarounds to the same end goal as we've had with Orstio's and Joomlahack's efforts.  That isn't to say that the 2 should be birthed together entirely...  but it'd be nice if via one or the other, the bridge could be rolled in as an option on install, or that perhaps a download of Joomla could come with an SMF built in and that certain pieces between the 2 apps. could be agreed upon as a no man's land other than to fix any security issues, and hopefully do so without breaking anything.

I do realize some SMF people might not want to use Joomla and instead choose <CMS here>, if they even need a CMS... and some Joomla people might not want to use SMF instead of <forum board here> if they even use a forum, but...  I think if both applications, judging by the past comraderie, could work out a way to make SMF and Joomla remain friendly to one another, or perhaps even get developers from Drupal and other CMS'es and even other boards to standardize some things via some form of global consortium...  perhaps going forward it wouldn't have all of the hoop-jumping, frustrations, and reinventing the wheel to get where everyone seemingly truly wants to go.

I do have to admit that Joomla isn't the end-all, be-all, answer to my needs in entirety.  But the way things are looking right now, without a suitable bridge or CMS...  SMF might not be for my needs either.  Much as I currently hate our current PHP Nuke situation for being the flaming pile of poop it is IMHO, there's some features and things that Nuke provides for us that I can't get with any other CMS once you work through all of the bugs to get it working.  While I'd love to get away from all of the bugs and junkiness and slowness that is Nuke...  giving up a half dozen features within the CMS'es that remain as options, or getting a CMS where I have to literally build onto the house of cards myself (as I feel Drupal is), or having a big huge monolithic app. that's quite awesome for it's power but a true nightmare to administrate (ala Xaraya), isn't truly the ideal.  I'm not a coder, I didn't turn to Joomla and SMF as an option with the intents of building onto it, I just wish to add onto an existing solution to get where I'd like our site to eventually be with a killer board and a nicely done, intuitive, and powerful CMS.  Right now, if this is how it's going to be...  I'm not sure if I can consider this anything but a dead end for my future development solutions.  I love SMF, love Joomla, wish for Joomla to have more features obviously, but feel that SMF is already lightyears ahead of where we are (PHPbb in Nuke) today.  I was hoping that 1.5 of Joomla would cater more towards that to fill in the rest of the gaps...  but without SMF, both sides are crumbling for my wants and needs.   :(

BarryBarry

All having opinions, but no1 seems 2b against a working solution.

(mostly @Orstio and colleague developers) are you willing to post/publish, or is there already somewhere / somehow we (the rest of us) can get a peak into the problems and or the progress thusfar, in the hope some1 finds unseen solutions or an other way of approach, which migth work.
It seems to me it's better not to reinvent the wheel (already working and/or not working code), but to progress on the existing experience and knowledge.

I really appreciate the already spent energy and given creativity, and totally understand teh made descissions. But I'd even like more to try and sweat some and spent some time trying to evolve into a working solution then sit back and give up on either Joomla or SMF.

Looking for an other solution can always be done, but I hope it's not necessary.


elfishtroll

Orsito, Thanks for  your well reasoned and thought out reply. I was initially suspicious when I read your initial message/post (about working in vain with the Joomla people for months and not being able to come to a solution re: bridging J1.5 and SMF)

Knowing some of the history with Joomla (the hissy fit split with Mambo, current internal squabbles within the Joomla community itself and difficulties maintaining development focus on J1.5 while keeping up with/maintaining old "legacy Joomla" ) I suspected (incorrectly as it apparently turns out) that somebody there had royally pissed you off into throwing up (in?) the towel.

Having taken some time to do a quick look through of the code, (you may say I should have before posting-but I refuse to hear that so dont even say it! :P) it is clear that supporting J1.5 falls more under NEW CODE DEVELOPMENT FOR A NEW CMS rather than "ongoing" support. Still, while I dont feel the issues are necessarily insurmountable, it does evolve though into a RESOURCES issue and you are the best at judging how much time YOU will have to breastfeed and wean this new J1.5 baby :)

Your professional reputation being important, it is always important to manage your commitments: A project not taken on earns far less ire than a half-assed poorly managed one. Framed in that context, no one (though disappointed) could fault you for framing it as a time management issue rather than a "worked for months with these damned joomla guys and all I got to show for it was this stupid T-Shirt!" type post! :D

Still where do we go from here?

Would it be possible to GPL your efforts with the J people to this point so that others may try taking up the ball?

Orstio

QuoteKnowing some of the history with Joomla (the hissy fit split with Mambo, current internal squabbles within the Joomla community itself and difficulties maintaining development focus on J1.5 while keeping up with/maintaining old "legacy Joomla" ) I suspected (incorrectly as it apparently turns out) that somebody there had royally pissed you off into throwing up (in?) the towel.

I would have been very disappointed in myself had that been the case.  While I would have certainly appreciated the Joomla devs being more responsive when I first asked for help, it was not a deciding factor.  Had they helped, I would probably have come to the conclusion sooner (as I did with PostNuke, where the devs were quite helpful), but that time frame is neither here nor there when the outcome is the same.

No one is more saddened than I am about the fact that there are now thousands of sites that will need to look for a different solution after their Joomla 1.0.x sites are no longer supported by the Joomla team.  I know that I'm letting down a lot of people with that announcement, and frankly, that does bother me.  But, I think you said it best:

QuoteA project not taken on earns far less ire than a half-assed poorly managed one.

I'd rather produce something I know will work to a bare minimum of my own satisfaction.  If that means dropping one CMS out of the arsenal I work on, then so be it.

QuoteFramed in that context, no one (though disappointed) could fault you for framing it as a time management issue rather than a "worked for months with these damned joomla guys and all I got to show for it was this stupid T-Shirt!" type post!

Time management is not the issue, though.  I've had plenty of time to work with other CMS software, so saying that I don't have time for Joomla would be outright lying, as far as I'm concerned. 

QuoteWould it be possible to GPL your efforts with the J people to this point so that others may try taking up the ball?

What I will do (perhaps immediately after I finish the TimberwolfCMS bridge) is document the usage of the SMF integration hooks in the bridges.  While there is documentation in the SMF Online Manual, it is still very open-ended about their usage.  The technique for their usage is not difficult to code, but it is difficult to understand at first, and not always easy to explain.  Now that I have functional coding examples, that should make a tutorial quite a bit easier, and allow for me to give specific details on the integration functions.

I'd say, given the fact that Joomla requires the output be returned to Joomla, SSI is probably going to be the most successful approach to start with.  That is the technique used in the 2.2 version of the bridge for Mambo, which is GPL, and may still be available at MamboXchange.  This version has a few issues, however, including problems with multiple SMF theme usage, no wrap on admin login or error pages (still within the Joomla framework, but not wrapped in the Joomla template), some upgrade issues from SMF (The bridge would need to be heavily modified for each and every upgrade to SMF), and the manual hacking of the bridge for SMF mods to work.  I would say that despite those annoyances, this would be the best technique in which to work, because it would still all stay within the Joomla framework.

Omega X

This is very sad.

I'd hope to see a future for this bridge on Joomla but that future seems bleak now.

I really like Joomla and SMF but It seems that I will have to make a very hard decision. And I really don't want to.

IT seems when the time comes, its going to be either Mambo 4.6 or something else. Because I will be keeping SMF. Sorry for them.

old blue

Ironic that Joomla forums are SMF - surely they must be aware of this issue for many users...

Advertisement: