[EventCalendar] Re: [firetree.net] Comment: "EventCalendar 3.1 Beta"

[Alex Tingle]

David Nutter wrote:
> Great plugin; I use it to manage the event listings on the BCS
> Open Source Specialist Group website.
> 
> I've been experimenting with the new plugin and have a few comments:

Thanks very much for your feedback.


> 1) Some of the formats in ec3_get_schedule() don't work as the
> strings cannot be interpolated due to single quotes (format_row
> and format_single). Easy to fix.

I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Can you send a patch, or an
example?

ec3_get_schedule() & ec3_the_schedule() are not documented. Perhaps they
should be.


> 2) I'm not sure why format_row is in the arguments list of
> ec3_the_schedule() rather than ec3_get_schedule().

The format_row parameter isn't used. Looks like a relic. I'll get rid of
it. If you want to play with the format of the schedule box, then you'll
have to "echo ec3_get_schedule();" instead. That shouldn't cause any
hardship.


> 3) Using ec3_the_schedule() in a template seems a better way of printing
> the schedule than hooking into 'filter_posts' but puts a bit of extra
> load on the user as they have to edit their template code.  I'm going to
> make this into a config option for my own use; do you want the patch
> when I'm done? 

Yes please send me patches.

Having said that, I'm not sure about this one - I want to minimise the
number of config options. You are proposing a config option that
disables the 'the_content' filter? If that's only going to be used by
people who are writing their own template, then ptemplatey would be
better off just removing the filter in their heait>
>('the_content','ec3_filter_the_content');

What do you think?


> 4) The upgrade step resets the dates of all the event posts. While
> the end result is more sensible, this causes a problem for users like
> me who use date-based permalinks which end up broken after the
> upgrade. A warning in the README to that effect would be good so
> affected users can comment out the relevant code.

Good point. I'd appreciate a patch for the README.

I'm not sure there's any way round this problem, though.

 
> 5) It's not clear to me whether the hack in wp-classes.php required
> by the previous version of the plugin is still necessary if one still
> has future dated posts for the reasons explained in (4). If you can
> shed any light on this I'd be grateful.  AFAICT it's only relevant when
> creating new future-dated posts, which isn't necessary with the new
> plugin.

Version 3.1 of the EC plugin ignores the post date, so I don't see how
the patch for v3.0.x can be relevant.


> Excellent software though, keep it up.

Thanks.

-Alex

-- 
:: Let me solve your problems: http://www.firetree.net/consulting/
:: alex.tingle AT firetree.net  +44-7901-552763