Seeking FC5 Web Dev Proj. Mngr. IDE w/ FTP
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| jsabarese Aug 18, 2006 5:34 PM EDT |
hi there. i'm going to apologize in advance for the length of this post-- i hope you are able to stick around long enough to make it through to the end. i don't mean to waste your time! i've been using Fedora Core 5 for a few months now, and i like it a lot. i'm probably an intermediate- to intermediate-advacend web dev guy. i've got some php sites w/ db's, javascript stuff, coldfusion stuff too... blah, blah-- but here's what i want to do. i have a few clients for whom i occasionally update just a little bit here and there, but regardless of the volume of editing-- it's essential that i maintain a consistent "Project" folder locally. i like BLUEFISH but to use bluefish and coordinate it w/ KDE Konquerer as an FTP client... although perfectly effective, it seems a bit of a "clunky", easily confused "which file is newer, where.." way to do it. (back in windows, i used this IDE called "Webcoder" by tanggaard software at tsware.net -- i really like it a lot, and one of the features that i've grown fond of there is the "Project" management-- so i can just keep my projects organized w/ the IDE's dedicated project files, and it will FTP right out of that app. i haven't found anything here in Fedora which does that-- not QUITE like that at least (ie. if i could FTP directly from BlueFish, then yes-- we'd have basically a matching setup.) so that's why i'm posting-- i want to know about YOUR technique. how do YOU manage larger projects, several subdirectories, images, etc-- and the occasional updating thereof? i know i'm probably just whining about nonsense here-- as far as some of you are concerned, and that's okay-- cause i understand where you're coming from-- but i'm just bad w/ the organization thing ADD / narcolepsy-- it all goes against my clarity of "where did i leave off?" I've used Eclipse (PHPEclipse), but i'm afraid i don't understand why it seems to "lock" the projects on localhost in such a way that i'm no longer able to view the files in a browser-- even as ROOT user-- even in Eclipse itself!? i think there's something wrong maybe w/ how i've installed it. Yum did it though! :) (anyone heard of that Eclipse issue?) i have no idea what's going on there either-- but that's why i stay away from Eclipse-- otherwise, it would seem to be a great choice. i'd love to hear your own ideas, and basic opinion on the whole thing. let's assume you use localhost/htdocs/... for testing your stuff, and you're linked to a MySQL there too, etc-- what do YOU use to test it all? how do YOU manage your web dev projects on Fedora Core 5? and is it somethign you'd use for, when needed, just simply updating a bit of text or imagery on a client website? (versatile, and powerful) thanks! sorry this is so verbose. i tend to "talk it out", so please forgive me. i hope you don't mind too much. i don't mean to "waste" your time, for certain-- i do respect it, and i respect the priviledge of posting here. thanks again. i look forward to your reply. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 6:14 PM EDT |
I'm beginning to think that everyone has their own technique. I'm not doing anything very heavy duty. I keep up my site and do occasional jobs for friends, but my technique isn't that different from yours. I keep separate local folders for each site. I use NVU for most work-up's and hand edit with gedit. I use krusader (which I like a lot more than konq) for ftp transfers and file management. Of course, I'm working on Debian :D. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 18, 2006 10:56 PM EDT |
I use BlueFish and gFTP for my needs. BlueFish has FTP support but it's a tad clunky. You can't do big operations or easily upload random files. That's what I use gFTP for. In my Windows days I used Chami's HTML-Kit. I haven't found anything comparable yet in Linux and it's still my favourite IDE. BlueFish comes close but it has a lot of problems. BTW I hand-code everything. I never use WYSIWYG editors. They cause far too many problems for good cross-browser compatibility. |
| jdixon Aug 19, 2006 5:17 AM EDT |
> I used Chami's HTML-Kit. I believe I've heard reports that HTML-Kit runs well under Wine. |
| jimf Aug 19, 2006 5:59 AM EDT |
> I never use WYSIWYG editors. They cause far too many problems for good cross-browser compatibility. And non GUI coding doesn't? Truthfully, the latest NVU is pretty darn compliant. Sure you have to touch it up, but ya gotta do that with anything. Overall, I've found it saves me time and effort. |
| dinotrac Aug 19, 2006 6:23 AM EDT |
jimf - I concur that NVU is pretty nice. I've also used Quanta under KDE, which isn't bad. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 21, 2006 4:25 AM EDT |
>> I never use WYSIWYG editors. They cause far too many problems for good cross-browser compatibility. > And non GUI coding doesn't? No. Any errors produced will be of your own making, not your tool's :-) > Truthfully, the latest NVU is pretty darn compliant. Sure you have to touch it up, but ya gotta do that with anything. Overall, I've found it saves me time and effort. The thing I find annoying about WYSIWYG is that they tend to undo or generally muck up any hand made tweaks you did if you edit the project again in the WYSIWYG editor. In that respect a WYSIWYG editor is much like a code generator for C or PHP: Never, ever edit computer generated code by hand if you care about maintainability. If the code is wrong, fix the tool that makes the code, not the code itself. Code generators (and IMHO by extension WYSIWYG web editors) are great if they generate flawless code. Sadly, they do not. "pretty darn compliant" isn't 100% cross browser compatible. Nothing against NVU BTW. Of all the WYSIWYG editors I tried I liked it the most. |
| jsabarese Oct 14, 2006 3:57 AM EDT |
wow-- sorry i missed all of the follow-up to my original inquiry. i see things kinda went into the direction of What you See is What you Get editing... hmmm.... what an uncommon topic... where to begin? hehehe
one thing i've noticed about IDE's... in particular the WYSI... variety, and most often w/ Linux users-- everyone seems to have their own definition of WYSIWYG. when i think of the acronym, i think first of Macromedia Dreamweaver (and / or Microsoft Front Page) because it truly is WYG-- not unlike MS Word... style the heck out of the text or whatever you want, and that's what comes out. same thing w/ DWMX, etc.-- put the cursor on the line, insert a table, fill it w/ content, etc... it's a very visual editing environment. on the contrary, to me-- Quanta+, PHPEclipse, Bluefish-- these are NOT WYSIWYG editors-- because there is no WYSI part of it-- (at least the way i use them), there is no "What You See"... all i see is code. granted, i can 'demo' the code in a browser while i've got the source file open, but there's no cursor placement / visual editing like can be done in Dreamweaver (or i think NVU and Seamonkey Composer... those are WYSIWYG as well).
I've found that WYSIWYG is often a misnomer for software which is more accurately described as an IDE (integrated development environment), which doesn't have to necessarily manipulate your code, but merely provide integration between editors specifically designed, for example, to highlight and provide 'hinting' for CSS, or HTML elements and attributes-- that has much less to do w/ "what you see", and much more to do your development environment. someone who works solely in gedit (or Notepad) experiences a much less suggestive environment, but i see no more "WYSIWYG" in Bluefish as i do in gedit, as far as coding is concerned. the difference is the hinting-- the development aides-- the dropdown, code-snippet, plug-it-in simplicity, which isn't any worse than it is an inexperienced user who doesn't know how to use those elements-- whether typing it in laborously all by hand, or allowing someone's pre-coded dropdown menu to place the code for you... it all comes down to the decision of what code to use where. so, for me-- using an IDE like bluefish, or Eclipse-- it's never WYG until i hit it in an external browser this thread illustrates my point-- which is it seems 'no one has a common definition', yet the arguments ensue, and things go haywire (i mean that in the most friendly "have a look at this phenomenon" way possible-- and totally not to poke fun, or say someone was wrong or right)... observe: > "sander" discusses, Bluefish, and goes on to add the he doesn't like WYSIWYG editors - to which "jimf" replies, in a sort of defense i assume, of WYSIWYG type... > 'non GUI' are [implied equally as potentially bad] (command line? or does non GUI mean 'text-only' ) as if to describe "the opposite" of what "sander" has listed-- yet, "sander" actually described a preference for 'text-only' / source-code intensive editors vs WYSIWYG... but - 'sander' goes on to state that "errors are produced by your own making" to which i'd have to say, i disagree-- i recall many times in which bluefish (depending on the settings) might have closed a < p > before i wanted it, and my code became erroneous. so-- i suppose the arguments will continue, and the idea of WYSIWYG will continue to be lumped w/ IDE and the gross misrepresentation thereof will probably in certain circles give fine editors like Bluefish / Eclipse / Quanta+ a 'bad-name' when what it really comes down to is-- if you know your code, and you know what you want it to look like in the browser-- it doesn't matter how you got to the final product, but one thing's for sure... WYSIWYG definitely sucks!... hehe (joking) sorry... i just find humor in it. my opinion is: if it works for you, then use it-- it not, then find something that does. myself, i finally figured out how to get PHPEclipse to work right (it's all about properly configuring the workarea setup) and in fact bluefish will do FTP if you merely select "Save as..." and enter the FTP location, or open a site using "open advanced" and use an FTP address instead of a local file. blah, blah... don't hate me for my lengthy reply!! cheers, all! |
You cannot post until you login.