I'm using refbase to serve up reference lists within a website. So far I've had good luck just using the iframe method. My question is, is it crazy to use the bleeding edge version? So far it seems to be working OK. I've had a few problems with importing citations, but no show stoppers. So my questions are: how likely is it that something will break completely if I use the bleeding edge version? And, will I be able to upgrade in the future if I start with the bleeding edge version?
In case it helps, here is a link to the website, so you can see roughly what I'm trying to do:
> I'm using refbase to serve up reference lists within a website
Nice to hear that someone is actually using the refbase include features!
> So far I've had good luck just using the iframe method
Good, though it seems that you've had to do some adjustments. Let us know if there's something you're missing.
Btw, I've done further bug fixes & improvements to the refbase include mechanisms, and I'll commit these changes soon.
> I've had a few problems with importing citations, but no show stoppers
The above applies here has well: If something isn't working for you, or you're missing a feature, please let us know so that we can see whether things can be improved. Thanks!
> how likely is it that something will break completely if I use the bleeding edge version?
Generally, we try to commit working code, so the bleeding-edge version should be fairly stable. However, occasionally things might be a bit wacky, broken, or unfinished. So there's no guarantee.
Contrastingly, the SVN trunk should always contain working code that has been well tested. So, for a production system, it's generally better to stay with the trunk (if you can).
That said, I'd consider the current version in the SVN bleeding-edge branch as stable, and we plan to push this version to the trunk really soon. In fact (at least, if my co-developers have no objections), I could push the branch to the trunk *today*. Let me know if this would be helpful for you.
> will I be able to upgrade in the future if I start with the bleeding edge version?
yes, that shouldn't cause any problems.
Nice! Thanks for the pointer.
Best regards, Matthias
Great, thank you, I feel a bit better about using the bleeding edge version. As far as I can recall the only adjustments I've had to make were all accessible from the ini.inc.php file, with the exception of some minor CSS changes. In fact, everything is working very well. The import errors are intermittent, but I'll post them if they come up again.
It would make me feel a little more confident to use the trunk version, but that's probably mostly psychological. Nevertheless, I'll check back periodically and will probably switch to trunk when the current bleeding edge version is pushed there.
The only thing that's really missing for me at the moment is that I can't get it set up so that simple search allows searching by keywords. Is this possible?
Thanks again, I really appreciate the help.
> I'll check back periodically and will probably switch to trunk
> when the current bleeding edge version is pushed there.
Ok, I'll probably update the trunk later today (or tomorrow). Thanks for your patience.
> The only thing that's really missing for me at the moment is that
> I can't get it set up so that simple search allows searching by
I see, thanks for the feedback. The search pages (and its code) stem from the very early days and could need an overhaul so that they are more flexible and easier to digest. This is planned, but due to time constraints, it will probably have to wait a bit longer.
> Is this possible?
I fear not, at least not without modification of the HTML & PHP code. To add support for another field to the current 'simple_search.php', one would need to copy the respective elements from 'advanced_search.php' to 'simple_search.php', and change function 'extractFormElementsSimple()' (in 'search.php') accordingly.
Another workaround would be to duplicate 'advanced_search.php' and function 'extractFormElementsAdvanced()' (also in 'search.php'), remove or comment out all code that deals with unwanted fields, and use them instead of the original 'simple_search.php' and function 'extractFormElementsSimple()'.
Of course, these are just hacks. In the future, this will hopefully be solved by a unified and more flexible search page.
Log in to post a comment.
Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:
You seem to have CSS turned off.
Please don't fill out this field.