ELOG Forum

Headings
It would be great to have a range of [H1][/H1], [H2][/H2], ... tags that map directly to their HTML counterparts (and have buttons, of course... ). That makes structuring an entry much easier in my opinion (and the output is easier to deal with for tools like html2ps) and I'm really missing those.
Tables
This one is probably more difficult to add, but support for simple tables would be enough. But this is more a "nice to have"...

Yes, I missed tables myself already. The headings I just put into the current SVN version (see this forum for how it works). Tables are a bit harder to implement and will come later. Do you have a proposal for a possible syntax? A 1:1 relation to HTML would look like this:

[tr][th]heading1[/th][th]heading2[/th][/tr] [tr][td]data1[/td][td]data2[/td][/tr]

But that does not look very sexy to me. Maybe somehting like

	heading 1	heading 2	heading 3
	data 1	data 2	data 3

this looks a bit like the "pipe" mode from a Wiki

what do you think?

1624

Tue Jan 24 14:43:19 2006

Suggestion additional ElCodes

I have to say, now that I'm finally on 2.6.x, I grew really fond of the ElCode stuff - great addition! It saves a lot of straight HTML typing for me... THANKS!

However, there are two things I'm missing:

Headings
It would be great to have a range of
,
, ... tags that map directly to their HTML counterparts (and have buttons, of course... ). That makes structuring an entry much easier in my opinion (and the output is easier to deal with for tools like html2ps) and I'm really missing those.
Tables
This one is probably more difficult to add, but support for simple tables would be enough. But this is more a "nice to have"...

1623

Tue Jan 24 14:39:21 2006

Re: Attachments in duplicated entries

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Bertram Metz wrote:

The duplicate command duplicates the entry text itself, but it does not duplicate attachments. If attachments in a duplicated entry are deleted, the original attachment files are deleted as well and cannot be accessed anymore within the original entry.

My suggestion is to copy the attached files too and to use file names of the copies in the duplicated entry.

I chaned it such that attachments are removed from the duplicated entry, which was easier to implement. I hope this is ok as well. The change is in SVN revision 1584.

Yes, that's ok for me.
Thank you very much Stefan.

Best Regards,
Bertram

1622

Tue Jan 24 08:11:13 2006

Re: Quicklink does not work for one field

mark james wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

mark james wrote:

I am not so bold as to log this as a bug but one of my Quicklink fields just do not work.

Sorry my late reply, but now I have fixed this problem. The update is under SVN and will be contained in the next release.

Thanks for that. I am now using ver V2.6.1-1622. So I guess that doesn't qualify as a "next release". I wonder if there is anything I could do to work around the issue?

Mark

In fact now the dropdown seems to be working but when I 'tick' an entry, it is not being written to the ascii file.

Can you try V2.6.1-1634? I fixed several issues with ticking entries coming from "MOptions" lists.

1621

Mon Jan 23 18:35:52 2006

Re: Quicklink does not work for one field

mark james wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

mark james wrote:

I am not so bold as to log this as a bug but one of my Quicklink fields just do not work.

Sorry my late reply, but now I have fixed this problem. The update is under SVN and will be contained in the next release.

Thanks for that. I am now using ver V2.6.1-1622. So I guess that doesn't qualify as a "next release". I wonder if there is anything I could do to work around the issue?

Mark

In fact now the dropdown seems to be working but when I 'tick' an entry, it is not being written to the ascii file.

1620

Mon Jan 23 17:32:20 2006

Re: Quicklink does not work for one field

Stefan Ritt wrote:

mark james wrote:

I am not so bold as to log this as a bug but one of my Quicklink fields just do not work.

Sorry my late reply, but now I have fixed this problem. The update is under SVN and will be contained in the next release.

Thanks for that. I am now using ver V2.6.1-1622. So I guess that doesn't qualify as a "next release". I wonder if there is anything I could do to work around the issue?

Mark

1619

Mon Jan 23 11:18:48 2006

Re: redirect errors via apache2

> > Since elog 2.6.0 we cannot redirect our elog via apache2.
> > 
> > in apache2.conf we have (had for a long time):
> > Redirect permanent /elog http://elog.oursite.com/elog/
> > ProxyPass /elog/ http://elog.oursite.com:8080/
> > 
> > When visiting the url, this results in:
> > The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
> > The proxy server could not handle the request GET /elog/myelog/.
> > 
> > After testing we found that ELOG V2.6.0-beta2 works just fine.
> > 2.6.0 stable crashes after visiting a redirected url.
> > 
> > Running on debian sarge
> 
> Have you tried 2.6.1. I released it just recently, so I don't know when it will be available for Debian.

No it doesn't work with 2.6.1. I hoped it would be fixed, but I should have reported it sooner.
I compiled 2.6.1 myself.
The original version was a debian package, after that, we compile elog ourselves and copy elogd manually over the old
version. Just to stay up-to-date.

> Have you checked that your "URL = xxx" statement in the config file is correct? I see above "myelog", while the
proxy passes requests to "elog".

I changed our urls, just to be safe.
myelog is a 'sublogbook', like forum here. http://elog.oursite.com/elog/myelog

We are running V2.6.0-beta2 and it runs fine, without any alterations to our config files.
All previous versions runned fine too.

update:
After further testing on a different server, it seems to be an issue with the proxy and the proxy_http modules in sarge.
after loading and unloading  proxy_http this is the error:
The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.

1618

Mon Jan 23 10:57:45 2006

Re: redirect errors via apache2

> Since elog 2.6.0 we cannot redirect our elog via apache2.
> 
> in apache2.conf we have (had for a long time):
> Redirect permanent /elog http://elog.oursite.com/elog/
> ProxyPass /elog/ http://elog.oursite.com:8080/
> 
> When visiting the url, this results in:
> The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
> The proxy server could not handle the request GET /elog/myelog/.
> 
> After testing we found that ELOG V2.6.0-beta2 works just fine.
> 2.6.0 stable crashes after visiting a redirected url.
> 
> Running on debian sarge

Have you tried 2.6.1. I released it just recently, so I don't know when it will be available for Debian. Have you
checked that your "URL = xxx" statement in the config file is correct? I see above "myelog", while the proxy
passes requests to "elog".

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 613, 614, 615 ... 806, 807, 808 Next

ELOG V3.1.5-3fb85fa6