Group Collaboration

[Starship]

Hi,

Not working for me [V.1.0.8] [RC7a]. 

Any suggestions?

Thank You!

[Kevin Carwile]

Hi,

Not working for me [V.1.0.8] [RC7a]. 

Any suggestions?

​It appears that IPS has made some changes to the codebase that is breaking my existing build of the GC application. I've been working on a fairly large update for the GC software that includes a lot of the suggestions and features already discussed in this thread, so I'm very close to another significant release. I guess I'll need to add this fix to the app and release it a little early.

Look for a new GC version in the marketplace within the next 24 hours that should get you fixed.

[Kevin Carwile]

Updated For 4.0 Gold! Plenty of new features!

• Updated for compatibility with IPS 4.0.0 "gold"
• fixed the ability to hide the front navigation link
• fixed incorrect post recounting issue
• Added built in import utility for rsyvarth social groups 2.x
• content feeds (widgets, etc) on collab pages will now only show content from that collab
• content feeds on non-collab pages will only show non-collab content and content the user has access to see in collabs
• added new private listing mode for collab categories
• added ability to move/copy non-collab content into collabs
• added ability to extract content from collabs into main site
• added featured/latest collabs widgets
• added autofill of member name when inviting to collab
• added support for disabling "view other members topics" inside collabs
• collab title in the group header now links to the collab homepage
• collabs now inherit join mode of models
• collabs now inherit default member title of models

[Wayne B]

Latest version of Collaboration installed on the Gold release of IPB 4

When I enable the application I get

Fatal error: Call to undefined method IPS\Member::collabs() in /home/polcom/public_html/dev/system/Theme/Theme.php(624) : eval()'d code on line 9257

Disable it everything is fine again.

[Wayne B]

Ignore my last - a run through of the Something is not working corrected some database errors and that has resolved it.

[Wayne B]

Hi Kevin

Is there a way to set all new collaborations created in a specific category to be Unapproved meaning that they require mod/admin approval before they actually appear live for all to see? Or would that need to be done through Rules?

Thanks

[Kevin Carwile]

Is there a way to set all new collaborations created in a specific category to be Unapproved meaning that they require mod/admin approval before they actually appear live for all to see? Or would that need to be done through Rules?

 

You could definitely do that with rules. But that might not be a bad fearure to add to GC.

[Ocean West]

not sure if it exists - but is the same thing true for deleting content - i mean if someone set something up then got their feathers ruffled and just pulled the plug deleting all content in the process? Or is there a "send request to admin to delete this "group" or something to that effect.  ( been busy hadn't had a chance to check )

[Kevin Carwile]

not sure if it exists - but is the same thing true for deleting content - i mean if someone set something up then got their feathers ruffled and just pulled the plug deleting all content in the process? Or is there a "send request to admin to delete this "group" or something to that effect.  ( been busy hadn't had a chance to check )

Collab owners could possibly delete all content within the collab, but not the collab itself. You do have the option to remove the collab owners ability to delete content on an app by app basis in the collab category settings.

[TLeM4]

I have something wrong with collab, with the sitemap generator task :
Fatal error: Access to undeclared static property: IPS\core\Statuses\Status::$containerNodeClass in /[path-to-ipb]/init.php(426) : eval()'d code on line 65

As long as Collab is installed i have that error, as soon as Collab is removed (not just disabled), the error disapear...

Small point : Because the last update with chat break the community, this is a clean install (with just some settings set).

[JiigSaaw]

Unable to install Collab, Error 1S111/1 - Sorry, you do not have permission for that!

IPS 4.0.1

[Wayne B]

Hi @Kevin Carwile - could we have the ability to import RSS feeds into collaboration forums just like we can standard forum areas?

[Kevin Carwile]

How do you currently import rss feeds to forums and how is GC preventing you from doing it for collab forums? Is this something you want collab owners to be able to do?

[Wayne B]

Hi @Kevin Carwile

I currently use the RSS import tool in the ACP - that allows you to specify which forum it should be imported to and the status etc so unapproved/hidden on import, visible on import, locked etc

Its great for auto stimulating debate by providing news articles to discuss from whatever source I configure. 

The issue is that I cannot choose a collaboration forum area as it does not appear in the list of destinations available. 

Personally I would only want these set up from the ACP and therefore do not need collaboration owners to have the ability to set these up.

Best Wishes

 

[Wayne B]

For the benefit of everyone else I have also asked @Kevin Carwile for the following which he has said he is working on in a future release to save others asking the same thing;

 

Would it be possible to remove on a category by category basis the requirement for Joining a collaboration? Just being able to disable this element would give it more flexibility for our particular needs.

Also if it is disabled, prevent a collaboration owner having the ability to re-enable it.

This also brings me on to the ability to control on a category by category basis which parts a collaboration owner has access to. For example if I didn't want in one category a collaboration owner to have access to manage roles or access to manage pages etc making it that collaborations in these categories are required to follow a model for example.

[Kevin Carwile]

The issue is that I cannot choose a collaboration forum area as it does not appear in the list of destinations available. 

Personally I would only want these set up from the ACP and therefore do not need collaboration owners to have the ability to set these up.

​Here's what you could do as an administrator:

1. Move the forum out of the collaboration temporarily.
2. Set up the RSS import.
3. Move the forum back into the collaboration.

I believe that will accomplish your goal.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Kevin Carwile

[Wayne B]

​Here's what you could do as an administrator:

1. Move the forum out of the collaboration temporarily.
2. Set up the RSS import.
3. Move the forum back into the collaboration.

I believe that will accomplish your goal.

Hi 

The issue with that is it would be impractical to do as the imports are not a one off. For example some are set to import new content every hour some are set for once a week through the current tool in the core. 

I think it would be ideal for a more integrated solution or perhaps a hook (if available) that allows you to hook into anywhere in the ACP where the list of forums shows to select adding all available collaborations to the list. 

This would resolve the RSS issue however it would also integrate collaboration into the many areas of the ACP where the forum select  list is available for selection.

[Kevin Carwile]

You would only need to do it once to select the forum as a destination. The import will work on the forum while it is part of a collaboration or not. In fact, there is no internal difference between a collab forum and a non collab forum. Only GC knows the difference.

The hook you speak of is already in place. It actually does the reverse of what you said. It filters the forums out that GC knows are part of a collab, because the core system doesnt know the difference. Otherwise management would become very messy with main site forums being buried and sandwiched in groups of collab forums (that could also possibly have the same names making it difficult to know if you even have the correct forum selected).

Not only that, but the IPS framework uses the same method to list forums in the main site index as it does in the forum select form field, so without the filter in place, all collab forums would also be listed in the main site index as well. And there is no practical way for the hook to know if the forum list is being requested for a form field or for the index page, so you cant have one without the other. In other words, if its exposed to the form select field, its also exposed to the forum index and every other part of IPS core that works with forum lists.

I think the best solution is to just move the individual forum in question out of the collaboration temporarily to expose it to the select field on a case by case basis rather than exposing every forum in every collab all at the same time.

[Wayne B]

You would only need to do it once to select the forum as a destination. The import will work on the forum while it is part of a collaboration or not. In fact, there is no internal difference between a collab forum and a non collab forum. Only GC knows the difference.

The hook you speak of is already in place. It actually does the reverse of what you said. It filters the forums out that GC knows are part of a collab, because the core system doesnt know the difference. Otherwise management would become very messy with main site forums being buried and sandwiched in groups of collab forums (that could also possibly have the same names making it difficult to know if you even have the correct forum selected).

Not only that, but the IPS framework uses the same method to list forums in the main site index as it does in the forum select form field, so without the filter in place, all collab forums would also be listed in the main site index as well. And there is no practical way for the hook to know if the forum list is being requested for a form field or for the index page, so you cant have one without the other. In other words, if its exposed to the form select field, its also exposed to the forum index and every other part of IPS core that works with forum lists.

I think the best solution is to just move the individual forum in question out of the collaboration temporarily to expose it to the select field on a case by case basis rather than exposing every forum in every collab all at the same time.

Sorry Kevin I didn't realise it would continue to work once moved back, my misunderstanding. As that's the case and with the rationales you have given above I agree with what you are suggesting most definitely.

At least we are all thinking it through though ?

[Ocean West]

Suggestion: strip out html characters from titles. Since it's open to the the members may open up issues. (not sure if it allowed it because I am admin or not ) 

 

 

Edited April 19, 2015 by Ocean West

[Ocean West]

observation: a forum must reside in a category - (in order to create one ) however once you create a category and a forum you can move the forum to the top level then delete the category. 

[Ocean West]

@Kevin Carwile - So far i love what this is going to become - just now getting a chance to formulate how I will deploy this.

by way of humble suggestion - I will attach a screen shot of a very basic mockup of the First Level I would like to see for Collab.

Currently on entering the collab you have just big black spaces for panoramic artwork to go in there, which means I'll now have to go re-new my subscription to iStockPhoto or some other place like that to find artwork that abstractly captures the essence of the content - sadly it will become dated very quickly and most likely be of images of a random group of office people or some other such cliche. 

This would be the first screen on entry in lieu of the pano-photos. For me the current system is too many levels deep for my users - and if I decide to move several categories and  forums over here I don't wish the people who maintain them to feel slighted or that these have become buried. 

The idea is that each Collab has its List and Grid View, and you can see at a glance the options that collab has ( apps ) and a blurb about what the group is about.  Not sure about the avatar - perhaps the member who set it up or probably the last person to contribute to the group (regardless of app) - or perhaps a logo of the group setting it up.

Also the "About Link" at the top of each collab would navigate to a basic "page" that describes what goes on here and who and what are. etc. And of course if the collab is open to allow users to add start their own via the link is there (see the second group) and also a button at the top that would be a drop down of available collabs 

humbly - stephen

[Achievement In Motion]

This may just be the best thing yet, but does it have full integration with nexus? As I'm going to be doing a subscription based tournaments, as well as do you plan on adding rosters and such?

[Kevin Carwile]

This may just be the best thing yet, but does it have full integration with nexus? As I'm going to be doing a subscription based tournaments, as well as do you plan on adding rosters and such?

​Not sure what full integration with nexus means, but it uses the core node and content api of IPS4 so it behaves like any other core application so any nexus features that work with core applications should also work with GC.

I don't plan on adding rosters and such to GC directly. That falls outside the scope of what GC is. GC's role is to allow members to form their own groups, and for their groups to own and manage their own content using existing IPS4 applications. For example, if a tournament application is built which adds a new "rosters" content type to the system which allows you to create tournament rosters and provides all the functionality related to managing that tournament, then GC would allow you to give groups the ability to use that application within their group.

In other words, the purpose of GC is not to be all things to all people, but rather allow all people to do all things.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Kevin Carwile

[Achievement In Motion]

​Not sure what full integration with nexus means, but it uses the core node and content api of IPS4 so it behaves like any other core application so any nexus features that work with core applications should also work with GC.

I don't plan on adding rosters and such to GC directly. That falls outside the scope of what GC is. GC's role is to allow members to form their own groups, and for their groups to own and manage their own content using existing IPS4 applications. For example, if a tournament application is built which adds a new "rosters" content type to the system which allows you to create tournament rosters and provides all the functionality related to managing that tournament, then GC would allow you to give groups the ability to use that application within their group.

In other words, the purpose of GC is not to be all things to all people, but rather allow all people to do all things.

​I appreciate the feedback and I should be able to handle the nexus portion, but as for the rosters do you think its possible to create something like this for me? I don't mind paying? Also I am purchasing GC as of right now.