Comments for Molten Core

Comment on Sitecores Lucene integration by Jens Mikkelsen

Jens Mikkelsen — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:09:02 +0000

Hi John,

I also replied you on the SDN, but here is the link to the 3 part articleseries on LearnSitecore again: http://learnsitecore.cmsuniverse.net//Developers/Articles/2009/06/LuceneQuery3.aspx

Comment on Dedicated image server and Sitecore by Jens Mikkelsen

Jens Mikkelsen — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:52:56 +0000

Hi Max,

I just tried it out. The problem is that the ExpandLinks processor is called just before the GetMediaField processor. Therefore it won’t expand the links correctly. You can switch the two processors around:

Also you need to replacen /~/media in the imagefields, so the code for replacing the links should look like this instead:

Regex regex = new Regex(“/?~/media/”);
return regex.Replace(baseExpands, ImageUrl);

Hope that makes sense… And sorry for the late reply

Comment on Sitecores Lucene integration by John Bubriski

John Bubriski — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:30:32 +0000

How exactly would you save the path in a field? Right now I am trying to limit the index to only items under /sitecore/content/ but the only way I find to do it is to filter the hit results in my for loop.

How can I filter the index exactly? I don’t know how to add the path field as an indexed field in the web.config.

Thanks.

Comment on Dedicated image server and Sitecore by Max

Max — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:08:47 +0000

Would that be overridden in the CustomLinkProvider class or elsewhere?
Thanks,
Max.

Comment on Dedicated image server and Sitecore by Jens Mikkelsen

Jens Mikkelsen — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 14:45:22 +0000

Ahh, right you are! I only tested it for the rich text field.

With out having tested it yet, I guess you’ll have to override the renderField processor GetImageFieldValue as well. I’ll try it out this weekend and update the post.

Let me know if you get it to work.

Cheers
Jens

Comment on Dedicated image server and Sitecore by Max S.

Max S. — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 14:20:04 +0000

6.1.
Nothing custom.
Alex Shyba tried this as well and told me that this works for rich text fields, but not for Image fields.

Comment on Dedicated image server and Sitecore by Jens Mikkelsen

Jens Mikkelsen — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:52:05 +0000

Hi Max,

What version of Sitecore are you using? Do you have any other custom pipelines or something of the sort?

Cheers
Jens

Comment on Dedicated image server and Sitecore by Max S.

Max S. — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:21:56 +0000

Hi Jens,

I implemented this and can trap the entering and executing of the ExpandDynamicLinks method when I attach to the w3wp.exe process, but it has no effect – the image still generates locally, whether I append my server name or even return an empty string.

I followed all of the directions verbatim. Any idea what’s wrong?

Thanks in advance.

Comment on Will dynamics in .NET 4 change the way we do Sitecore? by briancaos

briancaos — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:23:24 +0000

I share the worries with Alex that the average developer will not be able to keep up with the new features of .NET. I myself is still new to LINQ, and link is old news now.

But that souldn’t keep Sitecore from adopting the dynamic language support, as long as you keep the old interfaces as well.
I am looking forward to seeing a DynamicObject implementation in the next release of Sitecore

Comment on Will dynamics in .NET 4 change the way we do Sitecore? by Eldblom

Eldblom — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:22:02 +0000

Anders: thanks, ill try to keep up the good work;-)
Lars & Alex: good to hear that we can expect something like this from Sitecore. The point i’m trying to make here is that we are all doing “late-binding” today, specifying fields in strings. The dynamics in .net 4, as described in the example, will not give change the Sitecore code actually running – therefore there will be no performance penalty aside from the one given from using the dynamic keyword. This penalty will most likely be very very minimal, since its mostly about a few extra method calls.
The cool feature – if implementing IDynamicMetaObjectProvider in the Sitecore Item class – is that the class can be used both as a static class (as today, preserving backwards compatibility) AND as a dynamic type. In my view, it really solves the adoption problem, as it does not force the developer.