Another fork (this time with a Java connector)

in Community Support » Feature Requests • 1 year ago

JASFinder

I'm planning the above fork of FCKeditor and the c5 Filemanager.

The problems I have with the c5 filemanager are:

* It seems to have been abandoned by the original developers
* It does not support any of the server side connectors of FCKeditor
* It does not use the same XML 'wire protocol' as FCKeditor

There is someone maintaining a fork, but the above requirements mean I will have to make considerable changes, and probably use the connectors from FCKeditor.

So I'm at the planning stage of this, so if anyone has any comments or wants to help comment on the new forum.

Replies(6)

jasonhuck

Re: Another fork (this time with a Java connector)

1 year ago

You are of course absolutely free to fork the project as it has been released into the public domain. Just to provide a bit of clarification regarding its status:

We haven't abandoned the project -- we use it every day on dozens of sites -- but (a) we are not offering support, and (b) right now we just don't have the resources to investigate bug reports and test every patch (particularly for connectors that we ourselves do not use) before committing it to the repository. We've simply made it available for public consumption -- with absolutely no restrictions beyond the (open source) licenses of the third party plugins it relies on -- with the hopes of eventually finding some time to incorporate the many additional connectors, localizations, etc. that have been developed.

As for integrating with FCKEditor, it was never intended for this project to re-use FCKEditor's server-side connectors or use the same API. It would be much, much simpler to just create a new Java connector using the provided JSON API than it would be to retrofit the UI to use the connectors from the old FCKEditor filemanager.

- jason

Comment

northshor..

Re: Another fork (this time with a Java connector)

1 year ago

Having provided a few patches to your filemanager and got to know it, I feel that it would be easier to make 'filemanager' use the simple XML to the server that FCKeditor used. As you say, your aims are different, that's why I think a fork is the only option, as you are unlikely to accept patches that change the server protocol back to XML.

Also, I have a custom Java connector for an LMS that I support. This would take more effort to rewrite than to add XML to 'filemanager'.

Comment

Guest

Re: Another fork (this time with a Java connector)

1 year ago

Have you any link to java connector?

Comment

Guest

Re: Another fork (this time with a Java connector)

1 year ago

You need to use the JASFinder code from:

svn co https://jasfinder.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/jasfinder/jasfinder/tags/v0-1/ jasfinder

The Java connector code is almost identical to the original FCKEditor java connector. The code is at:

svn co https://jasfinder.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/jasfinder/jasfinder-java/tags/v0-1/ jasfinder-java

I would put up some zip or tgz for you, but I'm travelling at the moment.

Comment

paul_klin..

Re: Another fork (this time with a Java connector)

10 months ago

I also created a fork of the filemanager a year ago (Feb. 2010). At first I did this to create the coldfusion connectivity, and to bundle it with a CKEditor version. Later on, I rewrote quite a bit of the javascript UI of the filemanager, which increased the usability quite a lot. Probably, these changes have also been made in other forks of this project, which makes all that effort quite a shame.

Details of my ckeditor coldfusion fork can be found at http://www.railodeveloper.com/post.cfm/ckeditor-3-with-coldfusion-filemanager-version-2-0-for-free

I then actually mailed to corefive to ask if the changes could be incorporated into the main product, but unfortunately never received a reply. I read now in this forum that there is a coldfusion connector, so I will check to see if that's my code, or if someone else has gone to the same trouble to create it. In both cases it is a pity that there are 2 variants floating around.

It would be great to make this software a genuine opensource project. There is an audience, there are contributors, and there is a great piece of software which can still evolve! Then, we could do proper versioning, bug tracking, github forking, and mainly: one single source, to prevent a whole lot of double work.

@jasonhuck: I assume you are responsible for the original c5 code? If so, could we have a chat in the near future, together with everyone else who forked this project (simogeo, northshorefiend, myself, others?), to try and bring it back to one source, and appoint someone to manage this opensource project?
Hope to hear from you soon!

Comment

Guest