Smarty Template Engine

[Marc Geldon]

Hopefully WB3 is based on the Smarty Template Engine (I read something here and there).

So if you need any help with Smarty, I would be very happy if I can help you with something.

I use Smarty on our e-commerce solution and have only the best experiences with it. But: There a a lot of possibilities how to create the structure of the Smarty templates.

Maybe you can post your idea here how you want to create the structure in the Smarty templates? So we discuss this here and maybe give you (Ryan) some ideas...

Hope to hear from you soon.

Marc

[Rahya]

What's about the now using method wrong !? It's simple, open and fast
You can work with your knowledge of CSS/HTML/PHP - Fine! 

[icouto]

It seems that WB3 *will* use Smarty. This is truly a shame. It just gives developers one more thing they have to learn in order to work with the software - and makes the software less usable for many. There are many developers totally unfamiliar with Smarty, and who will jump to a competing CMS once they find out that developing and tweaking any templates will depend on familiarity with the Smarty engine.

I must admit, I am quite disappointed, and puzzled, as the current system is already simple and totally functional. 

[Ryan]

icouto, if you read up in the forum you will find that I have chosen to implement Smarty for a number of reasons, as it gives us many benefits over PHP templates.
Smarty is only as hard to learn as the implementation, which will be very simple in WB3. You should not judge past experience with Smarty on how it will affect WB3.

[icouto]

Ryan, thank you for your prompt response!

I will certainly wait to see the final version before making a final judgement. I have been very impressed by WB so far, and this inspires me to trust your choice.

[lexscripta]

There are many developers totally unfamiliar with Smarty, and who will jump to a competing CMS once they find out that developing and tweaking any templates will depend on familiarity with the Smarty engine.

And there are a LOT more that will come over, because Smarty is the only way to keep from being hamstrung in your design environment. If WB doesn't move to Smarty - or similar templating engine, THAT would be the tragedy. I think this new technology is scarry to many, but thats because they haven't looked at Smarty. As a designer. You want Smarty - trust me - this is mild growing pains, thats all...

LexScripta

[maddin]

well, i am a web-designer, and i can say:

Smarty is for ***

Have you ever coded with it?
For example, xt:commerce uses Smarty.
And what do you get?
Just a piece of crap.

Smarty is nice for global CMS, but i was so glad, i found WB.

WB is straight, easy, simple.

Therefore i like it.

My opinion is, if WB changes to Smarty, it will become just another bloated CMS, like Typo3 or else.

But just my opinion...

[ruebenwurzel]

Hello,

never worked with smarty, but only heard bad things like what maddin wrote about smarty. So my first opinion was if wb uses smarty it looses one of the biggest points why i love WB, the easy handling. But Ryan, the developper of WB, changed my mind with his promise to integrate smarty in wb in such a way, that developping templates is as easy as now with the only difference that instaed of the php tags similar smarty tags will be used. So trust him and expect a WB 3 Version wich has smarty included (what is quite shure) and as easy to handle as the template generation in WB 2.x.

Matthias

[Panther]

I have no real experience with Smarty, but as I new user to WB, the current setup is what drew me to it.

I know enough HTML and PHP that working with this is a breeze.

So... where's a good place to go to learn about Smarty Templates to see if it can live up to what is promised?

[doc]

Hello Panther,

simply have a look on the project website to check out the features in more detail.

Regards Christian

[tamith]

icouto, if you read up in the forum you will find that I have chosen to implement Smarty for a number of reasons, as it gives us many benefits over PHP templates.
Smarty is only as hard to learn as the implementation, which will be very simple in WB3. You should not judge past experience with Smarty on how it will affect WB3.

I am fairly new with WB and after having created sites with Joomla/Mambo, I can say that the appeal of WB is its ease of being able to port templates to WB. I gave up with CMS Made Simple after struggling with Smarty. In all honestly, Ryan, the templating in WB is one of WB's greatest strength and you don't want to lose your customers over this change. There's a saying, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[BeefStake]

I have to agree with everyone here (if thats possible.... )
First of all I like WB BECAUSE its simple, I made the template on my site in a matter of minutes, not the hours it takes to build a working template with Mambo/Joomla and no I'm not exaggerating I've developed many Joomla,Typo 3 and more recently a SilverStripe template.
You have to take in the difference of features/pug-ins and depth you want to implement however I believe i can build a site in WB in a quarter the time the same construction would be built in SilverStripe (however WB could never match the power of SS.)
On the other hand I am a Web Designer with a large amount of HTML/CSS/PHP skillz...
I've used Smarty and agree with the dare I say...n00bz, if you don't have any scripting skillz you may be more attracted to the Smarty engine.

Still everything said i would prefer that Smary be kept as a plug-in if possible, just to leave it as a choice not an inevitabilit...

//BeefStake Out

[point0fsale]

It seems that WB3 *will* use Smarty. This is truly a shame. It just gives developers one more thing they have to learn in order to work with the software - and makes the software less usable for many. There are many developers totally unfamiliar with Smarty, and who will jump to a competing CMS once they find out that developing and tweaking any templates will depend on familiarity with the Smarty engine.

I must admit, I am quite disappointed, and puzzled, as the current system is already simple and totally functional. 

This follows the trend of many many applications and developers bowing to the latest bell or whistle. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Mess up a perfectly good CMS by adding some gadget to it. We don't want it. Reconsider ruining this fine application. Change for change's sake is not a good change.

[vizmotion]

As just one voice I also want to ask not to have smarty integrated in WB. Being fairly new to WB less than a year it has taken me less time to get others up to speed on creating template for WB than any other CMS that I have seen/used. WB is clean and well structured. I think it is brilliant and I have over 25 years of technology development. Maybe offer it as a module or plugin.

By the way what is the reason for wanting to use Smarty and is there another way to accomplish the same goals?

[SaBRENT]

I've only used smarty a few times and didn’t really like it. I was unable do exactly what I was looking to create. On the Positive side this would open up to the people that love smarty and can code very well in it. Although I think it would be a huge step to make it an option for use of multiple template systems including the current WB standard and allow the users of WB3 to choose the system to template in. Sort of like a module for template systems.

[Jeroen]

I am a great fan of using a (well documented) template engine so you can separate program logic from design; I think smarty is well documented.

If you look at the crash course on www.smarty.net/crashcourse.php then u will see that smarty is a not that hard; I really liked the way it handles loops.

I used smarty for several projects now and find using smarty less complicated than making a new module for website baker. (Not that that is hard; it is just getting used to it  )

My 2 cents…

Jeroen

[GRID8400]

Probably will switch CMS when WB3 because of the use of Smarty, a pity because I am truly in love with WB2.x

 

[Bramus]

Well i think if WB3 is gonna use Smarty i'm also gonna stop using WB, or i need to fix Smarty so fast that i can use it as i'm using it now.

But as far as i think i will be quitting using WB as the CMS system for my websites. Maybe i use 2.7 (or the latest version withouth smarty).

[Waldschwein]

Hello!

Nobody makes you using WB3 if you don't like it - just use WB2.x.  Support, updates, etc. will be given independent from WB3.

Regards Michael

[Revive]

Interesting. With all due respect, which is A LOT, I would ask the WB team, Ryan, etc., to reconsider using SMARTY.
THE main reasons why people absolutely LOVE WB is because of it's simplicity, and it's speed. Once you add another layer of parsing data.. you will, by definition, add additional unneeded delay.

Here is a link regarding Smarty, from a programmer that has been using is for a long time. Maybe this will shed some light on this topic, as well as hopefully re-focus the WB team on the crowd they've aimed at - those who like it simple and easy to use. If you want to add something, how about a Section 'class suffixes' that would allow you to style a specific Section within a page via CSS... that would be great. Smarty on the other hand...  not so great. Read this article and see what you think.http://hasin.wordpress.com/2008/01/05/once-upon-a-time-there-was-smarty/


If WB does proceed using Smarty, and unless the implementation can overcome the flaws mentioned in the article, which could very well be possible (we have the utmost faith in the WB team),.. then, unfortunately, we will move all our sites back to Joomla!. Joomla! is a great product, but it is, in most cases, highly bloated and complex to teach a new administrator of a site. With WB, it is simple and straight forward. The same thing goes for templating. Porting or creating templates for WB takes very little time in comparison with those for Joomla! and WB loads 10 times faster..

I truly hope that WB doesn't digress from continuing to provide a world class product to it's community. You guys, the WB team, have created a truly remarked product that is so straight forward and un-bloated! Best of luck and wisdom to you in your decision making process.

[Waldschwein]

Hello Revive!

Thanks for that really well-founded opinion. I also hope there was Smarty. Have one Web-Software built with smarty.  It is everything except easy and logical.

Regards Michael

[Revive]

Hello Revive!

Thanks for that really well-founded opinion. I also hope there was Smarty. Have one Web-Software built with smarty.  It is everything except easy and logical.

Regards Michael

Thank you for the compliment, and response. I wanted to make sure there was no misunderstanding, as you mentioned in your post that you wish there WAS smarty.... I believe integrating Smarty into WB3 will be the crossroads in which WB looses much of the critical mass of users it has gained, due to introducing a new, and largely unnecessary learning curve. WB has created a community on the foundation of simplicity and ease of use... by changing that, it will ultimately change the course that WB is heading, leaving behind many users and starting anew to gain users that would be attracted to Smarty. Smarty was once great, to separate design from coding,.. but the truth is, it is not needed now, with the ease and simplicity of building a template.. read the article in the my previous post, I think this shines a clear, bright light on why Smarty is unneeded and will bloat what is one of the fastest, most reliable CMS's available.

In my humble opinion, WB's greatest asset, and you will soon agree once you read nearly every post praising this CMS, is that people can 'pick it up' and run quickly with it. They can easily install and configure a great site in very little and with minimal, if any, frustration and wonderful support. To take WB to the next level, the WB team might want to consider looking at the needs of the already current users.. and add value instead of changing directions.

Moving toward a highly modular environment, where developers could create modules for specific functions within WB, and then having the ability within the Admin to has these modules show on certain pages, even in certain blocks, would be great.. Think of Joomla! without all the difficult section/category/article and menu correlation.. But instead, a CMS that allows a user to create content to be placed on any page, in any location, with a simple visual layout of pages (the pages view in admin) that WB has... that would be Great!

This would open the CMS to developers creating modules or plugins, whatever you want to call them, in JS and AJAX, allowing for faster data caching and better performance. To 'update' the look and feel mootools could be used to animate the  menu without bloating the load times, etc. The end result? A robust, EASY TO LEARN, CMS that has unlimited capability, thanks to the developer community.

Again, this is just my view point. And once WB3 is out, I will give the respect due the WB Team by testing and trying the new release. It is as that point that I, and many others, will ultimately have to make a choice to move forward with WB or another solution.

Thanks again WB! I wouldn't be sharing my thoughts on this if I didn't think WB had an incredible potential.

[Lotus]

Agree with Revive, this is also the course i woud like WB to head into the future. Global template information, multilanguage etc. I rather stick with plain PHP-MySQL code than some other syntax, learning something "more useful".
Smarty, why not make it a choice for those who like it? cant it coexist with WBs template enginge today?

[Ryan]

Smarty, why not make it a choice for those who like it? cant it coexist with WBs template enginge today?

There are so many people not following the guidelines about posting that my message of smarty being an option has gotten lost. Maybe i should update the first post to say that it will be an option.

[Lotus]

Yeah that is great! That it is an option...