We talked about doing this with content types and views to keep it a bit more flexible than faq.module.

Comments

sreynen’s picture

StatusFileSize
new1.27 KB

First feature attempt attached. This should create a content type and a view at /faq.

beeradb’s picture

StatusFileSize
new232 bytes

Made a few changes to this...

  • Renamed the module to cod_faq. We should make sure we're namespacing this stuff
  • Moved the menu item from primary to secondary links. As per our (drupalcampcolorados) comps. I imagine this is a secondary menu item for most people
  • Gave the page view display a name.
greggles’s picture

Status:Active» Needs review
beeradb’s picture

StatusFileSize
new1.25 KB

That tgz is broken. I'm not sure why but when I rename this feature it only exports a .info file. Here's the other changes though, can someone else try to rename the feature?

sreynen’s picture

StatusFileSize
new207 bytes

New export, with beerad's changes.

sreynen’s picture

StatusFileSize
new1.25 KB

Now with components!

sreynen’s picture

Assigned:sreynen» Unassigned

I'm done working on this for now.

coltrane’s picture

Version:» 6.x-1.x-dev
StatusFileSize
new8.46 KB

Here's sreynen's tgz as a patch against cod_support dev and created from Features 1.0. This looks almost RTBC to me, but I think we should consider a sort or maybe draggable views. Thoughts?

coltrane’s picture

StatusFileSize
new8.46 KB

Hmmn, somehow that patch didn't get uploaded.

ezra-g’s picture

Sorry for the late review here.
My understanding is that the FAQ module provides a few different ways of displaying FAQ information that are useful for a wide range of sites. While we *can* create a custom view for it, I think we'd be providing more folks with the features they want if we used FAQ and potentially provided another view as an alternative. I'm open to reasons why what's here is preferable, though.

greggles’s picture

I feel like using a monolithic module when we could build it with views+cck+whatevs is bad because...it teaches cod's users "to get features, install a new module" instead of "to get features, configure views+cck+whatevs." Clearly the latter is what those in this thread prefer, so we should help others learn that.

Giving them examples of good configurations of views+cck helps them learn to do it.

coltrane’s picture

The FAQ feature could be easily replaced by the FAQ module too. Part of the question of which to choose is asking whether COD/COD Support should be feature-rich or try and be lightweight? Where does the FAQ fit in there (rich or lightweight)?

greggles’s picture

fwiw, there is also http://github.com/Lullabot/feature_faq

The only part of it I don't like is the draggable views and the fact that, on github, we can't easily include it into the tarball from drupal.org.

gadams’s picture

Drupal is moving to git based repository and version control.
I just added the FAQ Module http://drupal.org/module/faq versus implementing Lullabots' feature_faq to my COD Installation.

It appears to me that FAQ Module and Feature_FAQ are essentially the same, just Feature_FAQ posses draggable views which is a desirable piece of functionality.

gadams’s picture

Okay - I've been using both and I agree with greggles in comment #13 http://drupal.org/node/784456#comment-3560934

I think that even though Feature_FAQ is very cool the FAQ Module itself would be a better integration in to COD.
Feature_FAQ requires too many additional modules which could potentially be harmful to implementations of COD on lower end systems such as shared hosting, etc.

greggles’s picture

Status:Needs review» Needs work

Since the consensus is to go with FAQ module, this N a bit of W.