Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
webdev
ParticipantJust nudging this question, as I'm in a similar situation again. I've got a number of different taxonomies attached to a custom post type, and I'd like to group them together within a MB field group, but using the standard WP interface.
Can you add the option for standard category/tag interface to the options for rendering taxonomies (select, select_advanced, checkbox, etc) and just use the post_tags_meta_box and post_categories_meta_box callback embedded in the field group?
Or is it not that simple?
January 13, 2024 at 12:42 AM in reply to: Adding Relationship field to backend user registration form #44281webdev
Participantah... thanks. The column name does the job - I still had the default 'title'.
Shame about the user registration page, but a good work around (for anyone who's interested) is to allow a New user to be created directly from the school post relationship field. This then creates the user and automatically creates the relationship as well...January 12, 2024 at 9:45 PM in reply to: Adding Relationship field to backend user registration form #44277webdev
ParticipantFurther to this, I've set both of these relationships to 'show as an admin column', and the relationships show up in the schools posts list, but not in the Users list - so it seems in general the user creation and listing parts are not behaving as expected.
Please note however, this is currently using the MetaBox Builder - I have not put the code into my plugin as yet. I tend to test things in the Builder first and then add the PHP once I'm happy with all the settings. I'm just mentioning this in case it might make a difference.
September 3, 2021 at 2:00 AM in reply to: Where to learn Twig for WordPress / {% set args %} - hierarchical CPTs #30559webdev
ParticipantHi,
I'd like to echo OPs good feelings about Twig in general, and I really like it's use in Metabox Views, but I also find it a bit confusing to know where to find relevant documentation.
For example, on the Timber docs you've linked, there is a reference to a number of functions in the URLHelper section: https://timber.github.io/docs/reference/timber-urlhelper/
Unfortunately, none of them seem to work,
For example if I put {{mb.var_dump(mb.get_current_url()}} in my View, the return is NULL.
Same with all of the URL helper functions on there as far as I can tell.
Can you give a bit more detail about what parts of Twig/Timber will and won't work?webdev
ParticipantThanks again Long,
Yes that's what I had to do in the end: get all users first, get the metadata attached to all users, then extract the users with the specified term.id.
It seems that is the quickest (only) waywebdev
ParticipantHi,
Thanks for the response.
If I set meta_compare to '=', I get no results... I already have the term.id I need (as this is all being generated in a view for archive pages).
As the taxonomy is hierarchical and is being chosen via a taxonomy_advanced UI in the user profile, doesn't MB save this as a serialized array in the DB? So for meta_compare: '=' to work, wouldn't I need to know the full serialized array, rather then one value within it?
Either way, meta_compare: '=' is definitely giving me no results.webdev
ParticipantEDIT:
The top query I put in DOES work with a bit of modification:{% set users = mb.get_users({ meta_key: 'the_custom_taxonomy', meta_value: term.id, meta_compare: 'LIKE', })%}BUT, if the term.id I'm looking for is '4', it also returns term ids LIKE that, ie, '44', '104' etc.
So, I guess now my question is how to search for exact values in serialized arrays...
I have tried meta_compare 'IN' and '=' and they return 0 results....webdev
ParticipantI agree this would be really useful.
In the meantime, to move fields that already have data into new groups, I'd just like to check.
Will this process ensure no data is lost?- create new custom field with same field type, settings and id inside the group
- remove old field outside the group
webdev
ParticipantThis is not resolved. You have put a fix in a repository somewhere and the core code is still broken.
There is no official update, so any of your existing software distributions are broken.
You have given no indication of when to expect the official update, so now I'm going to have to hack your code to get this to work so that my clients can get on with building their site.
It's really quite disappointing given that we are paying for this product. It's also the second time that an update has broken previously working functionality. The last time it was URL fields.
What assurances can you provide that this kind of thing won't happen again? We paid for the full Metabox suite in order to speed up development, but instead I find myself chasing down bugs that you have introduced and hacking core plugin code because you still haven't released an update 9 days after releasing a fix. 9 DAYS!!! Come on!webdev
ParticipantGreat, thanks.
Will there be a plugin update I can apply? I could add that manually, but if the official update is coming soon, I'll wait.webdev
ParticipantJust to add to this,
I have all debugging on, and nothing is showing on-screen or in the console. Have also tried the old 'disable all other plugins' thing and it definitely seems to be an issue with one or the other plugin.
Thankswebdev
ParticipantHi,
We also have the same issue. Any idea when the release will happen?
Thankswebdev
ParticipantI'm mainly thinking of when you want to have a taxonomy field in a metabox with other custom fields or taxonomies...
The main reason I started doing it is because I'm currently writing a plugin that has a LOT of taxonomies and custom fields for a custom post type, and the client wanted to group together related elements so as to avoid having so many metaboxes.
And it was really straight-forward using the functions I mention above. It would be useful for my purposes, but I can see it's a bit of an edge case 🙂
webdev
ParticipantWow, that was fast 🙂
I don't see any new versions yet, but maybe it'll take a while to show? Should I be looking for a new Metabox, Metabox AIO, or Metabox Groups?
webdev
ParticipantHi,
You're right... It does work, but it's very temperamental. I had to try for about 30 seconds before I found the sweet spot and it actually accepted the child element.It's much less obvious that it's been connected up properly than the standard WP menus, but it does work.
Perhaps it could be improved when you have time, but definitely not a priority 🙂
Thanks.
-
AuthorPosts