U++ framework: U++ Webs: Functioning, Layout , Design, Features and Structure of these forums, homepage etc. » What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging?

Home » Community » U++ Webs: Functioning, Layout , Design, Features and Structure of these forums, homepage etc. » What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging?

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging? [message #4514 is a reply to message #4512]

Sun, 13 August 2006 10:32

mirek
Messages: 14291
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

My take:

Www site should be now regenerated using the uppweb package regulary anyway, as I am now adding quite a lot of new topics. (In fact, I made a "woe" to add one code-reference topic and one tutorial topic each day Smile

In fact, there was news system in uppweb implemented, later I have removed that feature when redesigning the website, mostly because I had no energy to write the news Smile

So for the moment, the simplest thing to do IMO is to make it back. Blog entries would simply be written in topic with specific name. Just take a look at topic++ of uppweb - there is www_news group with some old entries.

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging? By: fudadmin on Sat, 29 July 2006 15:57
		Re: What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging? By: rbmatt on Sat, 29 July 2006 17:04
		Re: What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging? By: fudadmin on Sat, 29 July 2006 18:33
		Re: What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging? By: rbmatt on Sun, 13 August 2006 06:58
		Re: What could be the best way to implement U++ blogging? By: mirek on Sun, 13 August 2006 10:32

Previous Topic:	www updated, a bit of docs added...
Next Topic:	How many file attachments per post would you like?

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sun Sep 13 12:14:35 GMT+2 2026

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00714 seconds