Joined: 20 Feb 2004
Posts: 126
Location: Phildadelphia, PA USA
Posted: 10/18/04 12:44
it just says phpbb because thats what the jamroom script looks for, its actually for mambo...you have to edit the file for your DB, if you are using 4.5.1 the db structure might be different
I am just stzarted working jamroom and such with my Mambo CMS. I have gotten the modules to work but the link, for example in the top 5 bands, goes to the wrong URL, what file do I adjust to send the proper URL of my jamroom. Do I put it in the parameter of the modules of what? Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
I am just stzarted working jamroom and such with my Mambo CMS. I have gotten the modules to work but the link, for example in the top 5 bands, goes to the wrong URL, what file do I adjust to send the proper URL of my jamroom. Do I put it in the parameter of the modules of what? Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 10
Location: Dallas, TX
Posted: 11/08/04 15:22
Hi werkkrew,
I'm curious to know if you are still planning on upgrading your Mambo modules to 4.5.1a? If so, do you have a general timeline of when you might have these ready? Thanks in advance.
I'm actually in the process of updating them right now. I had them done but my HD crashed and I've been setting up the code again over the past week. I'll have them out to Werkkrew by Sunday being that there's not much to update.
I have had great luck with your modules and notice some new ones that I can try out. Good Job and Thank you.
I do have a question or request. How can I make the Hottest Song and Hottest Band go by the month (or last 30 days) instead of since the site was started? Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks in advanced as always
Just a bump to this thread to gauge if the set of modules work for 4.5.1 (is this confirmed?)
Also, may I take this opportunity to thank you for the development of them!!!
I'm curious to understand why the development of systems like Jamroom aren't integrated with popular CMS's more fully?
I've ran several popular music sites myself before (mainly based just on HTML) and have looked at the CMS route seriously over the past few months. Mambo is without doubt one of the best for wide adoption by 'regular' web developers. Would it not make more sense to start incorporating Jamroom into Mambo?
Also, from a developers perspective, surely it would broaden its use and donations? Or would this restrict its use? Brian?
And, can I ask why popular developers like phpBB, Typo3, Mambo, Jamroom, etc, etc, can't collaborate on a standard logging/user/group system that is universal between CMS'/systems?
Joined: 18 Dec 2003
Posts: 13497
Location: Behind You
Posted: 12/31/04 16:23
Frankie101:
I'm curious to understand why the development of systems like Jamroom aren't integrated with popular CMS's more fully?
I've ran several popular music sites myself before (mainly based just on HTML) and have looked at the CMS route seriously over the past few months. Mambo is without doubt one of the best for wide adoption by 'regular' web developers. Would it not make more sense to start incorporating Jamroom into Mambo?
Also, from a developers perspective, surely it would broaden its use and donations? Or would this restrict its use? Brian?
And, can I ask why popular developers like phpBB, Typo3, Mambo, Jamroom, etc, etc, can't collaborate on a standard logging/user/group system that is universal between CMS'/systems?
I personally think Jamroom is a superb CMS all by itself. I would really hate to have to wade through all the CMS nonsense to get to the root of the system. Another downside is that bigguy would probably wind up having to support this other CMS software which just isn't fair.
From a developers perspective, just a guess, it seems like it would be a nightmare to have to constantly be updating and fixing your software to work with the latest whatever CMS. When you could just make a system that is super easy to integrate into pretty much anything with a little thought put into it. I see way to many developers trying to do a little of everything, and never doing 1 thing all the way to the highest quality/potential. I think its great bigguy maintains focus on his software, and if people want to get it integrated with other software, they can just figure it out- just like you would if you were using frontpage or dreamweaver or whatever other html editor.
As far as making something universal with other systems... I certainly don't want bigguy following the path of PHPBB or PHP-Nuke (problem laden software). Also, the Jamroom system requires more information regarding artists and users and more. Other softwares are designed around a simple user/pass system, and that's all they need.
Another way to think of this also is, why not ask the developers of the CMS systems to make it easier to integrate external software? That would probably be the wisest course of action.
Anyways, this all coming from a person who hates CMS systems with a passion. I sure hope bigguy doesn't waste his time messing with those, and spend that time working on new features instead
I hope I don't sound negative, I think CMS systems are great for some people... but for the rest of us, it would be extra developement time for something we will never ever use, and it would be very disapointing.
I sent the 4.5.1 files off but I don't know what happened. I'm pretty sure everything works. If someone wants to give them a test pm me and if it all turns out good I'll post them on my site.
Joined: 20 Feb 2004
Posts: 126
Location: Phildadelphia, PA USA
Posted: 01/12/05 21:19
In response to djmerlyn and others...
Mambo espeically is built around a component/module system
If someone was so inclined they could modify jamroom to act as a component for mambo but it wouldnt be worth it.
Jamroom does act as a good CMS all in itself actually, the only reason I use mambo with it is because my site was already using mambo before I knew about jamroom, and i just figured id integrate it.
Personally, id rather do it this way, having a modded component would take away from the features of jamroom and it would be very difficult to keep up with the rate of updates.
Not to mention that this way, its really pretty easy, and it works just fine.
