CMS Made Simple Forums

I use the module babel as well, but with 5 or 6 languages the smarty logic of the templates (there are the module templates too) becomes more and more difficult. In addition I was not able to find a language fallback (page-specified) with the babel module. Then there are some more smaller problems (e.g. there is only one search result page selectable), ...

But maybe you are right and I should give babel a chance.

Andiministrator wrote: I use the module babel as well, but with 5 or 6 languages the smarty logic of the templates (there are the module templates too) becomes more and more difficult.

Well, I replaced everything with {babel show=[keyword]} in the templates, so that there was no need to make special templates for every language. But it surely depends on individual design of the website.

Andiministrator wrote: But maybe you are right and I should give babel a chance.

Please, stay here. I hate to see someone going away

Everybody looking for multilingual solution should give the module Babel a try. As for to be multilingual in general. CMS Made Simple is UTF8 since version 1.6. This was first and very important step to the multilingual solution. It was a very important change.

I develop websites in many languages including Russian, which is cyrillic, and do not encounter any problems. And I have setuped a multilingual website with 4 languages: Russian, German, English and Lithuanian with core CMS Made Simple and it works, without any core modifications and is still upgradable.

tyman00 wrote: It is known many of you have been waiting (and waiting) for native Multi-lang functionality. It will come, but at the moment the changes coming for 2.0 are going to be useful for the very high majority of it's users and not a subset of the group. Essentially it will be better for everyone to start off with and then we can start targeting features that are going to be only used by smaller groups.

There are 15 CMSMS'forum sections including MLE fork'one in non-english languages and those users are considered "a subset of the group" or "smaller groups". That's kind of strange to read, but I am convinced that international users are numerous enough to help developping multil-ang CMSMS :

Would international users put some financial ressources together for the developpers to build a native multi-lang CMSMS ? I mean a kind of special fund for this sub-feature used by smaller groups ? Please PM any interest, minorities do need multi-lang CMSMS!

seensite wrote: Would international users put some financial ressources together for the developpers to build a native multi-lang CMSMS ? I mean a kind of special fund for this sub-feature used by smaller groups ? Please PM any interest, minorities do need multi-lang CMSMS!

I think that is no good idea. OpenSource is OpenSource and the development can not be bought...
No, we all "pay" with contributing and discussing and testing ... but not with money

This would invoke pressure and bring wrong attitudes or smell into the project.

I am with you that MLW is strongly needed and that we Non-English / Non-Americans are no minority...

our friednds maybe forget that we users / forum-members are used to speak and write English... that is why the english portion of the forum is the biggest one .. most of us are multilingual already ;=)

There is nothing wrong with sponsoring a project if you want to expedite some requests that you have. We all have professional lives so if we have a sponsored project on our plates we can justify doing more development during "business hours" instead of just during our free time.

At no point in time has Open Source meant that everything HAS to be done for free. The software is provided free of course, but it doesn't mean the development has to all be donated. The majority of the major/popular modules for CMSMS have had some sponsored work done to it at one point in time. Some feature upgrades to the Core of CMSMS have even been sponsored. Some people realize that the developers time is limited and they are serious enough about their request/need to expedite it's completion by paying for development during the professionals business hours.

Does every major feature need to be sponsored? Absolutely not! The majority aren't. But it is a surefire way to expedite the implementation of your needs in some form or another.

So if someone absolutely needs to have this feature now they are more than welcome to sponsor it, otherwise the higher priority tasks will be completed before any multi-lingual capabilities are addressed.


Quick Note: If there is further discussion on this subject I am going to branch it out to a new topic in The Lounge so the original topic is not derailed.

I'm going to double post...

seensite wrote: There are 15 CMSMS'forum sections including MLE fork'one in non-english languages and those users are considered "a subset of the group" or "smaller groups". That's kind of strange to read, but I am convinced that international users are numerous enough to help developping multil-ang CMSMS :

Would international users put some financial ressources together for the developpers to build a native multi-lang CMSMS ? I mean a kind of special fund for this sub-feature used by smaller groups ? Please PM any interest, minorities do need multi-lang CMSMS!

We aren't trying to discriminate, if that is how you feel. There are other features on the Roadmap for 2.x that have a higher priority and have a higher number of requests and demand when compared to Multi-lingual capabilities. We could release it with all of these features and multi-lang... but it will just push the release date off even further and we do not want to do that. 2.0 will cover a lot of needs and fix some things that should have been fixed for awhile now. Once we get a good foundation going (and tested by everyone) then these features can be easily and properly implemented instead of throwing something together.

tyman00 wrote: Quick Note: If there is further discussion on this subject I am going to branch it out to a new topic in The Lounge so the original topic is not derailed.

Yes, let's do this - why not in Help wanted (commercial) where financial questions are ?

I think it is better to move the multi-language topic (and if sponsorship would be an alternative) out to a seperate discussion.

I dont know what will be changed on the core of CMSms 2.0, but would it be a possibility to develop the multilanguage feature as a module? Or even to do further development on the Babel module?

Is the Silk Framework part of CMSms 2.0?

Andiministrator wrote: I think it is better to move the multi-language topic (and if sponsorship would be an alternative) out to a seperate discussion.

I think so too, and posted a sponsorship call here : http://forum.cmsmadesimple.org/index.ph ... 809.0.html

Andiministrator wrote: I dont know what will be changed on the core of CMSms 2.0, but would it be a possibility to develop the multilanguage feature as a module? Or even to do further development on the Babel module?

In the same post multilanguage functionnality is thought to be developped in CMSMS core, once for all to avoid compatibility issues with modules from base package or not, DB changes, ..., and to get it run as stable and secure as CMSMS core is now.

Andiministrator wrote: Is the Silk Framework part of CMSms 2.0?

No, it will be intergtrated in after 2.2.  Since they're sharing a lot of core libraries (Silk was based on the older 2.0 branch I wrote), it's not going to be an issue since things like the ORM and routes will remain the same.  The changes to CMSMS will mostly be in the admin panel and the processing loop....  things that need to be replaced down the road anyway.

IMHO and a little OT:

- I considered multilanguage very important but I agree with tyman00, Andiministrator and others this multilang posts must be in a separate discussion. This slow down the general discussion on 2.0. Or, If appropriate, start putting little things that will be useful later for the multilang but please try to follow the roadmap

- Nowadays multilang is not so dramatic, MLE, tree languages, babel, .... clearly all have their pros and cons, the important thing is to test the best depending on your CURRENT project (as, in my opinion, should always be)

- It's not good to put many many new features in release. Experiences in old releases with 1, 2 or 3 months of testing and after go immediately with minor releases to cover bugs is not a nice business card. Bugs are always present but better to have MORE major releases but with a few changed ONLY

- Instead for me it's VERY VERY VERY important (especially for the number of modules) invite the module writer to follow more the API made available, if needed for something specific signaling in FR (a new usefull function or a unbreakeable extension of a present function!) and not write workaround only (unfortunately here I put myself too ...) that may make inconsistent module at any time. On the other hand, the devs should strive to keep uptodate API-DOC and more infos of changes (or best practies) as I have seen here in some posts. Who has not used "skeleton" module when it came out a couple of years ago, raise your hand  (ciao _SjG_ )
Unfortunately there was never a true QA team (and I can not think it with all these modules and releases!) and so the same module admins should be as diligent as possible

then a bit of optimism  :)


Alby

Any updates yet?

No presents under the tree? 

Haven't heard a peep from Ted or Calguy in about six weeks.  The dev team must have cloistered themselves in a bunker somewhere to push through and get 2.0 ready for release...