What happened to the SCRAPBOOK FEATURES??
Permalink 2 users found helpful
Others have posted on this, but I will throw my bitch in with the lot - out of frustration mostly.
My site is scrapbook-driven. I just upgraded to the latest and greatest and what do I find? Well, for starters, even though scrapbooks "stayed", there is NO WAY TO ADD ONE TO THE PAGE! WHAT GOOD IS THAT? My custom navigation system was on scrapbook - meaning I now can't make new pages! wtF?
And stacks DOWNGRADE from scrapbook! I used to be able to bring ONE BLOCK in from a scrapbook - now I have to make a different stack for every block in my navigation/header. That's the main issue. Also, I used to be able to give custom names to the block, so that I would know that the spacer block I added was a "20px spacer" - because of the NAME I gave it. Now it's a blank strip.
Here's someone else's post on these issue, which has an even bigger list of bitches than mine:
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/customizing_c5/stacks-vs-...
But seriously, no support for legacy, just like that? Can't add a scrapbook, but claim you 'kept' it??
Chewing granola bars and raging,
Andrey
My site is scrapbook-driven. I just upgraded to the latest and greatest and what do I find? Well, for starters, even though scrapbooks "stayed", there is NO WAY TO ADD ONE TO THE PAGE! WHAT GOOD IS THAT? My custom navigation system was on scrapbook - meaning I now can't make new pages! wtF?
And stacks DOWNGRADE from scrapbook! I used to be able to bring ONE BLOCK in from a scrapbook - now I have to make a different stack for every block in my navigation/header. That's the main issue. Also, I used to be able to give custom names to the block, so that I would know that the spacer block I added was a "20px spacer" - because of the NAME I gave it. Now it's a blank strip.
Here's someone else's post on these issue, which has an even bigger list of bitches than mine:
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/customizing_c5/stacks-vs-...
But seriously, no support for legacy, just like that? Can't add a scrapbook, but claim you 'kept' it??
Chewing granola bars and raging,
Andrey
Is there ANY way to paste from scrapbook in 5.5? This is insane..
You can't even RENAME the stacks! It is astonishing to me that the C5 team would cripple such a critical feature when the replacement is so half-baked. PLEASE RETURN 'PASTE FROM SCRAPBOOK' FUNCTIONALITY UNTIL BLOCKS ARE HALFWAY USEFUL!
*STACKS
There is a round about way to display a scrapbook block that is not overly difficult.
Get the "PHP" block from the market.
Add the block where you want to display the scrapbook block.
Add something like...
If you want to put many blocks in the same PHP block you can.
Get the "PHP" block from the market.
Add the block where you want to display the scrapbook block.
Add something like...
$scrap = Block::getByName('scrapbook_block_name'); $scrap ->display();
If you want to put many blocks in the same PHP block you can.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Thanks for this. C5 team, hope you're seeing this thread!
I apologize for your case being a victim of the collateral damage of progress. ;)
A few thoughts:
1) Blocks in scrapbooks AND in stacks can be named. In fact you can now name any block, anywhere, through the custom templates UI. Thank your fellow community members for that one, it was an obvious feature we neglected in 5.5.0 and was incorporated as a pull request in 5.5.1
2) Stacks are far superior to scrapbooks for many reasons. First, there's just Stacks instead of Personal and Shared scrapbooks, both of which built in their own inconsistent way. Stacks basically use the page container, so you now have versioning and permissions which were absolutely missing from scrapbooks and were rather important to many folks. The most obvious way a stack is a compelling improvement is you can treat many blocks as one unit for a side nav, offering you the ability to make site wide changes (particularly around sort order) that you simply couldn't do before.
3) In terms of supporting legacy features, our philosophy was to not break existing sites, and drive people to use the better feature. That's why we left scrapbooks as they existed, but yanked any nod to them in the editing front end UI. In honest terms it was more important to us to not overwhelm a new user with "add from Stack, Personal Scrapbook, Global Scrapbook, or Clipboard" but instead give them the experience we all agreed was correct. The price we paid was yes, you can now longer add something from a scrapbook to the page. I believe this means you're going to have to update your navigation code to pull from a Stack instead of a Scrapbook. I completely recognize that's a pain to do, and I apologize for not having a solution that makes everyone happy with no effort involved. I know that's probably not what you want to hear, but there it is.. Stacks really are better! ;)
A few thoughts:
1) Blocks in scrapbooks AND in stacks can be named. In fact you can now name any block, anywhere, through the custom templates UI. Thank your fellow community members for that one, it was an obvious feature we neglected in 5.5.0 and was incorporated as a pull request in 5.5.1
2) Stacks are far superior to scrapbooks for many reasons. First, there's just Stacks instead of Personal and Shared scrapbooks, both of which built in their own inconsistent way. Stacks basically use the page container, so you now have versioning and permissions which were absolutely missing from scrapbooks and were rather important to many folks. The most obvious way a stack is a compelling improvement is you can treat many blocks as one unit for a side nav, offering you the ability to make site wide changes (particularly around sort order) that you simply couldn't do before.
3) In terms of supporting legacy features, our philosophy was to not break existing sites, and drive people to use the better feature. That's why we left scrapbooks as they existed, but yanked any nod to them in the editing front end UI. In honest terms it was more important to us to not overwhelm a new user with "add from Stack, Personal Scrapbook, Global Scrapbook, or Clipboard" but instead give them the experience we all agreed was correct. The price we paid was yes, you can now longer add something from a scrapbook to the page. I believe this means you're going to have to update your navigation code to pull from a Stack instead of a Scrapbook. I completely recognize that's a pain to do, and I apologize for not having a solution that makes everyone happy with no effort involved. I know that's probably not what you want to hear, but there it is.. Stacks really are better! ;)
Frz,
Stacks are simpler because features have been removed, plain and simple. That's not simplifying that's just lazy.
Scrapbooks had the option to add individual blocks from scrapbook, stacks do not (this is HUGE). Now I have to create tons of 1-block "stacks" so I can control blocks on the site centrally. What makes it TRULY IDIOTIC though, is that I'm doing this knowing that you will add this feature later, and I will have to recreate all the stacks AGAIN, but I have to go through this moronic process while you guys get your sh*t together SOLELY BECAUSE because no-one thought, "hey, until we introduce all the features of scrapbooks into stacks, maybe we shouldn't render the old feature unusable".
Scrapbooks also had the option to copy or alias upon placement, which was awesome. Now that insanely laborious copy/paste feature is introduced, and I'm not sure if that even supports linking vs. embedding.
I've been using C5 for three years and spent hundreds in the marketplace, and must say this is most bullsh*t thing the C5 team has done (that I can recall). You seriously neutered a core feature, CLAIMED to have legacy support, but effectively lied. If you are going to dumb-down your product by killing features instead of creatively improving the UI, at least be up-front about it and not misleading about legacy support just to get people to upgrade.
For a more complete list of failings of stacks, please see this thread:
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/customizing_c5/stacks-vs-...
Thanks,
Andrey
Stacks are simpler because features have been removed, plain and simple. That's not simplifying that's just lazy.
Scrapbooks had the option to add individual blocks from scrapbook, stacks do not (this is HUGE). Now I have to create tons of 1-block "stacks" so I can control blocks on the site centrally. What makes it TRULY IDIOTIC though, is that I'm doing this knowing that you will add this feature later, and I will have to recreate all the stacks AGAIN, but I have to go through this moronic process while you guys get your sh*t together SOLELY BECAUSE because no-one thought, "hey, until we introduce all the features of scrapbooks into stacks, maybe we shouldn't render the old feature unusable".
Scrapbooks also had the option to copy or alias upon placement, which was awesome. Now that insanely laborious copy/paste feature is introduced, and I'm not sure if that even supports linking vs. embedding.
I've been using C5 for three years and spent hundreds in the marketplace, and must say this is most bullsh*t thing the C5 team has done (that I can recall). You seriously neutered a core feature, CLAIMED to have legacy support, but effectively lied. If you are going to dumb-down your product by killing features instead of creatively improving the UI, at least be up-front about it and not misleading about legacy support just to get people to upgrade.
For a more complete list of failings of stacks, please see this thread:
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/customizing_c5/stacks-vs-...
Thanks,
Andrey
chill,
have you tried using the clipboard? I thinks thats really what you want, not a stack. The thing is, scrapbooks were really replaced by 2 things, the clipboard and the stacks. Stacks are for groups of blocks, clipboard is for singular blocks. There are definitely still some issues with it, but I think its much less confusing overall.
have you tried using the clipboard? I thinks thats really what you want, not a stack. The thing is, scrapbooks were really replaced by 2 things, the clipboard and the stacks. Stacks are for groups of blocks, clipboard is for singular blocks. There are definitely still some issues with it, but I think its much less confusing overall.
His beef about not being able to paste an individual block from a scrapbook is valid. We'll be adding that back. Obviously, once it is back no one will HAVE to move their blocks into their stacks.
Hey Andrew,
My only real beef here is this. I would like to rename the individual blocks with a given stack.
For example. The Addon Scrapbook Tabs when I got it to work with the latest version of C5 created an issue with the jQuery UI when I used the Add Layout when I was adding a page. So I "last night actually" butcher the entire Addon and using the Basic Test Addon in the developers download I was able to recreate a truly compatible Scrapbook Tabs.
The issue I have with Stacks right now is that with Scrapbooks I could rename the individual block and that block name would then be the name of the link on the tab.
I only just learn that you now have to create a custom template to rename the tabs. This raises another concern for me. I am willing to customize my version of Scrapbook Tabs to call a Stack but I realized that I would now have to figure out how to call the name of the block when I use a custom template just to name the block.
I like Scrapbook Tabs but Stacks have rendered this Addon useless.
I feel that C5 should keep the full functionality of Scrapbooks so a to not render Addons that took advantage of them useless. Yet slowly get developers and users to use Stacks more and more. Let the transition happen over time don't kill the feature just yet or at all at the moment.
To quote Steve Krug, "Don't Make Me Think." While this ideology is more for end users visiting a site. It can be applied to Developers and Designer alike.
I could use a guide to creating a custom templates for naming blocks within a Stack and how to call a Stack like I do with a Scrapbook and to be able to call the names of the block within the Stacks.
Creating a custom template sound tedious work while naming a block within a scrapbook with easy and required no real thought.
I think I made my point about the real loss of what Scrapbooks can do over Stacks.
My only real beef here is this. I would like to rename the individual blocks with a given stack.
For example. The Addon Scrapbook Tabs when I got it to work with the latest version of C5 created an issue with the jQuery UI when I used the Add Layout when I was adding a page. So I "last night actually" butcher the entire Addon and using the Basic Test Addon in the developers download I was able to recreate a truly compatible Scrapbook Tabs.
The issue I have with Stacks right now is that with Scrapbooks I could rename the individual block and that block name would then be the name of the link on the tab.
I only just learn that you now have to create a custom template to rename the tabs. This raises another concern for me. I am willing to customize my version of Scrapbook Tabs to call a Stack but I realized that I would now have to figure out how to call the name of the block when I use a custom template just to name the block.
I like Scrapbook Tabs but Stacks have rendered this Addon useless.
I feel that C5 should keep the full functionality of Scrapbooks so a to not render Addons that took advantage of them useless. Yet slowly get developers and users to use Stacks more and more. Let the transition happen over time don't kill the feature just yet or at all at the moment.
To quote Steve Krug, "Don't Make Me Think." While this ideology is more for end users visiting a site. It can be applied to Developers and Designer alike.
I could use a guide to creating a custom templates for naming blocks within a Stack and how to call a Stack like I do with a Scrapbook and to be able to call the names of the block within the Stacks.
Creating a custom template sound tedious work while naming a block within a scrapbook with easy and required no real thought.
I think I made my point about the real loss of what Scrapbooks can do over Stacks.
Hi Rafael,
You do not need to actually create a custom template to name the blocks -- the block name field just happens to be under the "custom template" menu options when you click on the block in edit mode.
I agree that this might be confusing at first, but I think it is the best option given the alternative (which would be to make a new popup menu item just for the block name -- which would add even more options to the already-over-populated popup menu list, and if I recall, Steve Krug also wouldn't want you to give the user too many options in menus).
You do not need to actually create a custom template to name the blocks -- the block name field just happens to be under the "custom template" menu options when you click on the block in edit mode.
I agree that this might be confusing at first, but I think it is the best option given the alternative (which would be to make a new popup menu item just for the block name -- which would add even more options to the already-over-populated popup menu list, and if I recall, Steve Krug also wouldn't want you to give the user too many options in menus).
I got what you said and tested it out so now I just trying to get my version of scrapbook tabs to work using the stacks. I know that I'm close to figuring it out. I'm just having trouble calling to my list of stacks from my custom block's Add/Edit form.
Do you mean that you're trying to bring up a list of all available stacks, or you are trying to get a list of the blocks that are within a stack you already have access to?
If you need the list of stacks, I think this code should work:
Concrete5 treats each stack as if it were a page, so as you're looping through the list of stacks, each $stack object is the same as a $page or $collection object (meaning you can call the same functions on it as you would a page/collection object, e.g. "getCollectionName()", etc.).
If, on the other hand, you already have a stack object, you can get its blocks like so:
(You don't have to display the blocks in that loop there -- I'm just showing an example of what you could do with that kind of object).
Hope this helps!
-Jordan
If you need the list of stacks, I think this code should work:
$sl = Loader::model('stack/list'); $stacks = $sl->get(); foreach ($stacks as $stack) { echo $stack->getCollectionName(); }
Concrete5 treats each stack as if it were a page, so as you're looping through the list of stacks, each $stack object is the same as a $page or $collection object (meaning you can call the same functions on it as you would a page/collection object, e.g. "getCollectionName()", etc.).
If, on the other hand, you already have a stack object, you can get its blocks like so:
$blocks = $stack->getBlocks(STACKS_AREA_NAME); foreach ($blocks as $block) { $block->display(); }
(You don't have to display the blocks in that loop there -- I'm just showing an example of what you could do with that kind of object).
Hope this helps!
-Jordan
I'll work on using the examples you have shared with me. I'll let you know if I hit a wall.
Hi Andrew, when do you expect this to show up in an update? We're really looking forward to this one. Since we have a Scrapbook called SiteWide with about 50 blocks in it. And I don't like replacing this with about 50 stacks...
And for that matter: is there a way to sort the stacks alphabetically?
And for that matter: is there a way to sort the stacks alphabetically?
I just actually pushed code up to the 5.5.3-devel branch that supports adding the entire stack OR just an individual block within the stack. So this will make it into 5.6, which we are planning on having a public beta for in August, with an end-of-August launch.
There's no ability to sort stacks currently, but you could always sort them manually in the sitemap (just show system pages and reorder the various nodes beneath the "Stacks" page.
EDIT: Actually, it looks like reordering doesn't work in that way. We will fix that and let the stacks that you add actually honor sitemap sort order when they are displayed in that page.
There's no ability to sort stacks currently, but you could always sort them manually in the sitemap (just show system pages and reorder the various nodes beneath the "Stacks" page.
EDIT: Actually, it looks like reordering doesn't work in that way. We will fix that and let the stacks that you add actually honor sitemap sort order when they are displayed in that page.
About sorting the stacks: I've tried that, but they still show up in
Dashboard/Stacks in the order they are added in. I've cleared the
cache, that made no difference.
Op 18 jul 2012, om 01:00 heeft concrete5 Community het volgende
geschreven:
Dashboard/Stacks in the order they are added in. I've cleared the
cache, that made no difference.
Op 18 jul 2012, om 01:00 heeft concrete5 Community het volgende
geschreven:
Yes, you are correct. I had to tweak the stacklist class to fix this. It will be included in the next update (along with the add individual block functionality.)
Thanks Andrew, that's great!
Op 18 jul 2012, om 19:03 heeft concrete5 Community het volgende
geschreven:
Op 18 jul 2012, om 19:03 heeft concrete5 Community het volgende
geschreven:
Hi, so 5.6 is here now.
I've just added an individual block from a stack to the Homepage from one of our sites. So far so good.
When clicking 'Edit' on this block it tells me: "This block was copied from another location. Editing it will create a new instance of it."
OK. I close the block without changing anything. And go to the Stack to change it.
But that doesn't work: changing the block in the Stack, will NOT change it's copy on my Homepage.
A few Things:
- This blue messages is bogus: the block allready IS a new instance. Because it has no connection any more with its originating Stack.
- What good is this feature??? I still have to create LOTS of 1block-stacks in order to use a block throughout the (600+ pages) site.
- From reading this whole threat I really understood that this would NOT be necessary.
- I've convinced our client to wait until september to update, because then this problem would be fixed: now I have to tell them it is NOT.
I must say: I still think C5 is fantastic and you guys rock for the work you do, but today I am NOT AMUSED!!!
I've just added an individual block from a stack to the Homepage from one of our sites. So far so good.
When clicking 'Edit' on this block it tells me: "This block was copied from another location. Editing it will create a new instance of it."
OK. I close the block without changing anything. And go to the Stack to change it.
But that doesn't work: changing the block in the Stack, will NOT change it's copy on my Homepage.
A few Things:
- This blue messages is bogus: the block allready IS a new instance. Because it has no connection any more with its originating Stack.
- What good is this feature??? I still have to create LOTS of 1block-stacks in order to use a block throughout the (600+ pages) site.
- From reading this whole threat I really understood that this would NOT be necessary.
- I've convinced our client to wait until september to update, because then this problem would be fixed: now I have to tell them it is NOT.
I must say: I still think C5 is fantastic and you guys rock for the work you do, but today I am NOT AMUSED!!!
1. When you're editing the block in the stack, make sure you approve the changes that you make. It's a button that appears after you edit the stack's block.
2. I don't understand this complaint. You no longer need to make 1-block stacks. You can make a stack with many blocks in it and add one block from that stack into the page.
2. I don't understand this complaint. You no longer need to make 1-block stacks. You can make a stack with many blocks in it and add one block from that stack into the page.
1. Check
2. If I add one block from that stack into the page, and change the block (in its originating Stack, and make sure I've click the approve-changes button) it will NOT update the block on the page. That is: on my system.
Do I understand right that a SINGLE block added from a stack should update?
2. If I add one block from that stack into the page, and change the block (in its originating Stack, and make sure I've click the approve-changes button) it will NOT update the block on the page. That is: on my system.
Do I understand right that a SINGLE block added from a stack should update?
@andrew
I'm really looking forward to your answer on this topic!
And I'm not the only one (http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/usage/stacks-not-updating-blocks-on-page/#393784)
I'm really looking forward to your answer on this topic!
And I'm not the only one (http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/usage/stacks-not-updating-blocks-on-page/#393784)
Did you ever get an answer to this question?
I also assumed that a single block from a stack should update when changed in the stack.
Colin
I also assumed that a single block from a stack should update when changed in the stack.
Colin
Eurh, no. Not yet.
This looks like a bug in the clipboard where updated source blocks don't update the clipboard versions. This happens because when a block is updated the block gets a new ID, and the clipboard still points to the old block. We will look into fixing this for both stacks and the clipboard.
Hi Andrew, do you have any idea on when we can expect to see this bug fixed in an update? We're really looking forward to this!
I may be misunderstanding what you want to do, but when you say "scrapbooks had the option to add individual blocks from scrapbook", I think you're talking about the "Block::getByName()" code that you can put in templates? If so, you can do this as of 5.5.1 -- you name the blocks by clicking on them and choosing "Custom Template" and entering the block name there. You can do this from a stack or from a block on a normal page.
EDIT: If you had the blocks named in your old site via the scrapbook, I *think* those names should still be there in the database.
EDIT: If you had the blocks named in your old site via the scrapbook, I *think* those names should still be there in the database.
If I do this ( assign custom block name ) without putting the block into a "stack" OR "scrapbook", meaning that I assign a custom name to a block that is placed on page, I get nothing when pragmatically getting block by name.
After playing around in 5.5.1, in order to display blocks pragmatically,e.g. Block::getByName('custom_block_name')->display(), the blocks must either be in the scrapbook or in a stack. *Note, if two blocks share the same name i.e. one block in scrapbook and one in stacks, then the block in the stack takes precedence ...
The blocks with custom names in the pages aren't accessible... is there a special method for doing this?
UPDATE: that's not possible, I mis-understood ... blocks can be "NAMED" from pages :-) doh
After playing around in 5.5.1, in order to display blocks pragmatically,e.g. Block::getByName('custom_block_name')->display(), the blocks must either be in the scrapbook or in a stack. *Note, if two blocks share the same name i.e. one block in scrapbook and one in stacks, then the block in the stack takes precedence ...
The blocks with custom names in the pages aren't accessible... is there a special method for doing this?
UPDATE: that's not possible, I mis-understood ... blocks can be "NAMED" from pages :-) doh
Cmon - you've "spent hundreds in the marketplace"... This is a laughable offensive statement
Do not bite the hand that feeds you!
Go out and get one quote for a commercial CMS that has all of the features that C5 has
It would take maybe an hour or two tops to paste your html into stacks from your PROD server to the updated C5 on your DEV server
The world's smallest violin plays for you...
Do not bite the hand that feeds you!
Go out and get one quote for a commercial CMS that has all of the features that C5 has
It would take maybe an hour or two tops to paste your html into stacks from your PROD server to the updated C5 on your DEV server
The world's smallest violin plays for you...
You basically didn't read my original post, did you?
1. My main point was the deceptive way in which C5 claimed to support legacy, but in reality did not build in support for it. If you keep scrapbooks, but remove the 'add from scrapbook' option, it's not much good, is it? That's like saying "You can keep the car!" then taking the keys.
There are two ways to push an upgrade:
A. Make a better version that users will naturally adopt, then a few versions later, deprecate the old system.
or
B. Force the upgrade by leaving no choice (especially when claiming to support legacy, only to have the user find out after the upgrade that it's not true).
If C5 chooses to strip functionality to appease the lowest-common-denominator user who gets confused if there is more than one option to pick, that's their choice. I just wish they would actually support legacy if they STATE they do.
Andrey
1. My main point was the deceptive way in which C5 claimed to support legacy, but in reality did not build in support for it. If you keep scrapbooks, but remove the 'add from scrapbook' option, it's not much good, is it? That's like saying "You can keep the car!" then taking the keys.
There are two ways to push an upgrade:
A. Make a better version that users will naturally adopt, then a few versions later, deprecate the old system.
or
B. Force the upgrade by leaving no choice (especially when claiming to support legacy, only to have the user find out after the upgrade that it's not true).
If C5 chooses to strip functionality to appease the lowest-common-denominator user who gets confused if there is more than one option to pick, that's their choice. I just wish they would actually support legacy if they STATE they do.
Andrey
Just to provide some balance to this debate, I love global areas and stack. Currently deploying my fourth 5.5x site and I have been really taking advantage of the features of these two developments.
Thanks to the whole Core team - I know there a some dissenters but there are also numerous people, like me, who think that you have made real progress with 5.5.
Thanks to the whole Core team - I know there a some dissenters but there are also numerous people, like me, who think that you have made real progress with 5.5.
Couldn't agree more. This is a backward step if you ask me. Scrapbooks were not just easier to use but a more logical approach, and interestingly, far easier for non-computer savvy clients to actually follow and use.
I have upgraded one site so far to 5.6 and the client is now begging me to downrgrade it back to how it used to be. The dashboard is way worse than the old one, and a lot more confusing, but everyone's biggest gripe is scrapbooks. While they are still there, you can't use them like you used to.
If you want stacks fine, but please, please bring back the full functionality of scrapbooks like it used to be so we can just get on with our work.
I have upgraded one site so far to 5.6 and the client is now begging me to downrgrade it back to how it used to be. The dashboard is way worse than the old one, and a lot more confusing, but everyone's biggest gripe is scrapbooks. While they are still there, you can't use them like you used to.
If you want stacks fine, but please, please bring back the full functionality of scrapbooks like it used to be so we can just get on with our work.
11 months on and still no one has a sensible answer to any post in this forum about what to do if you upgrade a scrapbook driven site. That seems to be because the truth is you have to begin again from scratch.
You can see your scrapbook in the latest version, but you can't use it at all when in page edit mode. Therefore it is rencdered useless. There is no way to change a scrapbook or its items in to stacks that the C5 team have included.
And everyone neatly manages to side step the questions about converting or in any way usefully using your old scrapbook or scrapbooks.
So all you previous hard work looks like it has to go down the drain and you have to begin writing all your old scrapbook items as stacks from the beginning.
Now that's how to support your users isn't it.
You can see your scrapbook in the latest version, but you can't use it at all when in page edit mode. Therefore it is rencdered useless. There is no way to change a scrapbook or its items in to stacks that the C5 team have included.
And everyone neatly manages to side step the questions about converting or in any way usefully using your old scrapbook or scrapbooks.
So all you previous hard work looks like it has to go down the drain and you have to begin writing all your old scrapbook items as stacks from the beginning.
Now that's how to support your users isn't it.
This thread has the info on how to upgrade scrapbook items to stacks.http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/usage/is-there-a-way-to-c...
Tried this. Just got the message 'access denied'. Didn't work for me
This code doesn't work with version 5.6.02
You can now insert single blocks from a stack into a page, but the problem is, that the copied block will not refresh when the original has been edited. See this thread:
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/usage/stacks-not-updating...
Additionally to the discussion, a bug report was sent on March 30, 2013. But there is no bug fix in sight, as it seems.
http://www.concrete5.org/developers/bugs/5-6-1-2/individual-blocks-...
Andy or Franz, can you please give us some information if you are working on a fix?
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/usage/stacks-not-updating...
Additionally to the discussion, a bug report was sent on March 30, 2013. But there is no bug fix in sight, as it seems.
http://www.concrete5.org/developers/bugs/5-6-1-2/individual-blocks-...
Andy or Franz, can you please give us some information if you are working on a fix?
I wonder if this was resolved or if it was the death of C5. I made the mistake of upgrading to 5.6.0.1 and lost all my Scrapbook entries. And like the other posts, my sites are scrapbook-driven. Now that we're over two years into this, is there any way to get my scrapbook items back? Or do I have to recreate the entire website from scratch? Because I will definitely use something other than C5 if that's the case. You developers should just admit, C5 was awesome, until you broke it with your stacks. Which as far as universal comments go, stacks are hated by 95% of C5 users and only loved by 5% over the old scrapbook. I would love to know how to fix or undo this before I have to throw away three years worth of painstaking work.
Hiya - you can access your old scrapbook items by typing "scrapbook" into the search box in the top right. (See attached screenshot) You should be able to edit your items. From memory you cannot create any though.
You would normally start converting your old scrapbook items into new stacks. Unfortunately you cannot copy n paste YET (?) but there are features of stacks which are handy.
I think I would have preferred scrapbook items and a way of grouping them to reusing multiple content items (which is what stacks seems to be). Anyway - you may learn to appreciate stacks over time :)
You would normally start converting your old scrapbook items into new stacks. Unfortunately you cannot copy n paste YET (?) but there are features of stacks which are handy.
I think I would have preferred scrapbook items and a way of grouping them to reusing multiple content items (which is what stacks seems to be). Anyway - you may learn to appreciate stacks over time :)
