Syndication Input Sought

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Syndication Input Sought

Jeff Lambert
Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this scenario:

I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate, partly
through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
iframe on the subscriber¹s site.

To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together and
syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well as to
those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.

In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect solution,
so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by Automattic,
up on the plugin repository, http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to somewhat
recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on github,
which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I now
have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore unless
someone here has some thoughts about it.

So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the two
sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way to
parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone done
this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking² the
search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
service are only displaying content on their Intranets.

Specific info:

Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com

Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com

Future second site to push content to is:  http://www.thedieseldriver.com

Thanks in advance for your help!

Cheers,

Jeff



_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

Nikola Nikolov
Hi Jeff,

Have you stumbled upon the ThreeWP Broadcast(
http://plainview.se/wordpress/threewp-broadcast/ ) plugin? There's a free
and paid version(one-time payment, one year of updates and support - and
the support is pretty quick in general).
It's not fully automatic, meaning that you have to select what content
should be "broadcasted" to which sub-sites. You can do this when you're
creating a post, after you've created one, etc. You can also remove the
content from the child sites from the main site. You can update all local
links to point to the correct place(so instead of them pointing to the main
site, they'll point to the sub-site).

It's not a bad plugin and I've used it on a multisite with about 12
sub-sites and it works fairly well(a bit slow on a BlueHost shared hosting,
even though it's the more expensive option).

Nikola

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Jeff Lambert <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this scenario:
>
> I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate, partly
> through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
> iframe on the subscriber¹s site.
>
> To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together and
> syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well as to
> those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.
>
> In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
> WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect
> solution,
> so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by
> Automattic,
> up on the plugin repository,
> http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
> While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to somewhat
> recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on github,
> which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I now
> have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore
> unless
> someone here has some thoughts about it.
>
> So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the two
> sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way to
> parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone done
> this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking² the
> search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
> service are only displaying content on their Intranets.
>
> Specific info:
>
> Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com
>
> Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
> http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com
>
> Future second site to push content to is:  http://www.thedieseldriver.com
>
> Thanks in advance for your help!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

Xen
In reply to this post by Jeff Lambert
Hi,

I can only say that to me, the first solution you envisioned sounds really
inspired and creative and solid. But the alternative path you suggest
after, sounds just like you're running out of time and you need a quicker
solution.

I do hope you will be able to find something that really satisfies you..

All the best,

Bart.

ps. maybe you should push harder to get support on that plugin. I mean,
wherever, in here, somewhere else. "unless someone here has some thoughts
about it" is not a very invitational statement to make if you are looking
for that kind of help. That's like admitting defeat before you've even
asked anything...

Anyway, good luck.


On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jeff Lambert wrote:

> Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this scenario:
>
> I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate, partly
> through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
> iframe on the subscriber¹s site.
>
> To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together and
> syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well as to
> those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.
>
> In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
> WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect solution,
> so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by Automattic,
> up on the plugin repository, http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
> While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to somewhat
> recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on github,
> which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I now
> have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore unless
> someone here has some thoughts about it.
>
> So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the two
> sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way to
> parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone done
> this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking² the
> search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
> service are only displaying content on their Intranets.
>
> Specific info:
>
> Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com
>
> Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
> http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com
>
> Future second site to push content to is:  http://www.thedieseldriver.com
>
> Thanks in advance for your help!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

Jeff Lambert
Thanks Bart and Nikola.

Nikola - I’ll take a look at threewpbroadcast.

Bart - Probably am feeling defeated as I keep running into roadblocks on
this plugin and really don’t have the bandwidth, and likely the knowledge
to dig into the code.  I did a little looking around but think there are
things on the WP side I’m not aware of, especially given that it requires
JetPack be installed on the receiving site.  If you have thoughts on how
to get support, or engage someone to here to help make this plugin work,
I’m all ears.

Cheers,

Jeff

On 9/8/14, 1:15 AM, "Bart Schouten" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I can only say that to me, the first solution you envisioned sounds
>really
>inspired and creative and solid. But the alternative path you suggest
>after, sounds just like you're running out of time and you need a quicker
>solution.
>
>I do hope you will be able to find something that really satisfies you..
>
>All the best,
>
>Bart.
>
>ps. maybe you should push harder to get support on that plugin. I mean,
>wherever, in here, somewhere else. "unless someone here has some thoughts
>about it" is not a very invitational statement to make if you are looking
>for that kind of help. That's like admitting defeat before you've even
>asked anything...
>
>Anyway, good luck.
>
>
>On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jeff Lambert wrote:
>
>> Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this
>>scenario:
>>
>> I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate,
>>partly
>> through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
>> iframe on the subscriber¹s site.
>>
>> To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together
>>and
>> syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well
>>as to
>> those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.
>>
>> In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
>> WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect
>>solution,
>> so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by
>>Automattic,
>> up on the plugin repository,
>>http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
>> While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to
>>somewhat
>> recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on
>>github,
>> which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I
>>now
>> have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore
>>unless
>> someone here has some thoughts about it.
>>
>> So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the
>>two
>> sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way
>>to
>> parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone
>>done
>> this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking²
>>the
>> search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
>> service are only displaying content on their Intranets.
>>
>> Specific info:
>>
>> Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com
>>
>> Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
>> http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com
>>
>> Future second site to push content to is:
>>http://www.thedieseldriver.com
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your help!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers


_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

James DiGioia
It may be worth looking into the WP-API, which is the JSON api slated to go into core in 4.1 (I think). I haven't used it, but I think it will provide JSON endpoints withou requiring the Jetpack plugin, if you're looking to avoid that.

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Jeff Lambert <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Thanks Bart and Nikola.
> Nikola - I’ll take a look at threewpbroadcast.
> Bart - Probably am feeling defeated as I keep running into roadblocks on
> this plugin and really don’t have the bandwidth, and likely the knowledge
> to dig into the code.  I did a little looking around but think there are
> things on the WP side I’m not aware of, especially given that it requires
> JetPack be installed on the receiving site.  If you have thoughts on how
> to get support, or engage someone to here to help make this plugin work,
> I’m all ears.
> Cheers,
> Jeff
> On 9/8/14, 1:15 AM, "Bart Schouten" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>I can only say that to me, the first solution you envisioned sounds
>>really
>>inspired and creative and solid. But the alternative path you suggest
>>after, sounds just like you're running out of time and you need a quicker
>>solution.
>>
>>I do hope you will be able to find something that really satisfies you..
>>
>>All the best,
>>
>>Bart.
>>
>>ps. maybe you should push harder to get support on that plugin. I mean,
>>wherever, in here, somewhere else. "unless someone here has some thoughts
>>about it" is not a very invitational statement to make if you are looking
>>for that kind of help. That's like admitting defeat before you've even
>>asked anything...
>>
>>Anyway, good luck.
>>
>>
>>On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jeff Lambert wrote:
>>
>>> Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this
>>>scenario:
>>>
>>> I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate,
>>>partly
>>> through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
>>> iframe on the subscriber¹s site.
>>>
>>> To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together
>>>and
>>> syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well
>>>as to
>>> those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.
>>>
>>> In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
>>> WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect
>>>solution,
>>> so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by
>>>Automattic,
>>> up on the plugin repository,
>>>http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
>>> While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to
>>>somewhat
>>> recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on
>>>github,
>>> which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I
>>>now
>>> have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore
>>>unless
>>> someone here has some thoughts about it.
>>>
>>> So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the
>>>two
>>> sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way
>>>to
>>> parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone
>>>done
>>> this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking²
>>>the
>>> search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
>>> service are only displaying content on their Intranets.
>>>
>>> Specific info:
>>>
>>> Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com
>>>
>>> Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
>>> http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com
>>>
>>> Future second site to push content to is:
>>>http://www.thedieseldriver.com
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for your help!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> wp-hackers mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

Xen
That seems pretty good, like, exactly the same thing as the Facebook
"Graph" API.

But the only downside that you're making it extremely easy for anyone to
gain this type of access, if you're not careful. Which is why I would be
hesitant...

It's funny. The Facebook Graph API provides for less information than the
regular web interface. And all those developers that want to use it, are
complaining about that. For instance, you cannot even retrieve your own
friendslist unless every one of your friends give you (or your app)
permission to do so. Meanwhile, if you're willing to put in the effort,
all of that information is easily 'grabbable'.

In any case, I understand your feeling, Jeff. You can get exhausted from
trying things that don't ever seem to work. Jetpack is also not the most
...elegant or useful addition to the fleet. Suddenly you are mandated to
install a 21 meg plugin that comes with a million features and requires a
WP.com account to basically do anything, and that is actually not a plugin
itself but a plugin framework within the plugin framework of WP.org.
Personally, I intend to use it at some point, but I'm going to strip away
the all-too-obvious "container" aspect to it at least in terms of the user
interface (the word "Jetpack" is meaningless to me because it doesn't do
anything useful; "stats" and "akismet" are not). And get rid of all the
modules I don't use anyway, and will never use. After that it will just be
a common library to the few 'modules' I do use :) :p.

Just giving it its proper position ;-).

When I read the page at http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/, I
feel a lot of sadness. As if those developers that had once written those
words with inspiration, are now feeling drained, as you do. The plugin was
probably conceived as something relatively standalone. But today
everything has come under a heavier wind and this wind is pushing forward
in some sort of frenzy of WordPress.com integration of everything.

For example, one of the Jetpack advantages is listed as "if you let us do
your statistics, it will not burden your own servers, but rather ours,
that are extremely speedy." How one cloud-hosted server park can ever be
faster than a local server is beyond me, unless you'd be talking about the
caching advantages of webclients retrieving things like jQuery from
centrally hosted locations (such as some Google server) instead of your
site. But it is nonsensical to think that the computing power of millions
of decentralized hosts would be dwarfed by a few centrally hosted server
parks. And these guys think they are some kind of awesome. When you check
the stats page of a newly configured stats counter or API key or whatever,
you are greeted with the message "Whoa! Not so fast! We just started
counting, there's nothing here yet, DUDE." Liberally cited, but still,
that was the gist of the message. Completely inappropriate for something
that is meant to be a serious, boring (but still exciting) "accounting"
system. Suddenly we're all being turned into surfer dudes when really, we
just wanted to check out how that page looked.

Jetpack is really not that cool. Not nearly as cool as they try to make it
out to be..

So perhaps you're also feeling drained because that plugin you got excited
about, it is really at a true 'dead end' or at least a 'not feeling it
anymore' end.

So there's probably something that they're doing (or that someone is
doing) that is more in line with 'the times' and it is just a matter of
getting through the grief of having lost this old thing, so you can make
room for the new thing and I'm sure it will soon fall into your hands, or
cross paths with you...

It is just a bit of a feeling of depression I guess.. that I'm feeling
right now..

Kudos,

Bart.



On Mon, 8 Sep 2014, James DiGioia wrote:

> It may be worth looking into the WP-API, which is the JSON api slated to go into core in 4.1 (I think). I haven't used it, but I think it will provide JSON endpoints withou requiring the Jetpack plugin, if you're looking to avoid that.
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Jeff Lambert <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Bart and Nikola.
>> Nikola - I’ll take a look at threewpbroadcast.
>> Bart - Probably am feeling defeated as I keep running into roadblocks on
>> this plugin and really don’t have the bandwidth, and likely the knowledge
>> to dig into the code.  I did a little looking around but think there are
>> things on the WP side I’m not aware of, especially given that it requires
>> JetPack be installed on the receiving site.  If you have thoughts on how
>> to get support, or engage someone to here to help make this plugin work,
>> I’m all ears.
>> Cheers,
>> Jeff
>> On 9/8/14, 1:15 AM, "Bart Schouten" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I can only say that to me, the first solution you envisioned sounds
>>> really
>>> inspired and creative and solid. But the alternative path you suggest
>>> after, sounds just like you're running out of time and you need a quicker
>>> solution.
>>>
>>> I do hope you will be able to find something that really satisfies you..
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Bart.
>>>
>>> ps. maybe you should push harder to get support on that plugin. I mean,
>>> wherever, in here, somewhere else. "unless someone here has some thoughts
>>> about it" is not a very invitational statement to make if you are looking
>>> for that kind of help. That's like admitting defeat before you've even
>>> asked anything...
>>>
>>> Anyway, good luck.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jeff Lambert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this
>>>> scenario:
>>>>
>>>> I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate,
>>>> partly
>>>> through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
>>>> iframe on the subscriber¹s site.
>>>>
>>>> To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together
>>>> and
>>>> syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well
>>>> as to
>>>> those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.
>>>>
>>>> In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
>>>> WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect
>>>> solution,
>>>> so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by
>>>> Automattic,
>>>> up on the plugin repository,
>>>> http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
>>>> While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to
>>>> somewhat
>>>> recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on
>>>> github,
>>>> which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I
>>>> now
>>>> have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore
>>>> unless
>>>> someone here has some thoughts about it.
>>>>
>>>> So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the
>>>> two
>>>> sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way
>>>> to
>>>> parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone
>>>> done
>>>> this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking²
>>>> the
>>>> search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
>>>> service are only displaying content on their Intranets.
>>>>
>>>> Specific info:
>>>>
>>>> Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com
>>>>
>>>> Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
>>>> http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com
>>>>
>>>> Future second site to push content to is:
>>>> http://www.thedieseldriver.com
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance for your help!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> wp-hackers mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

"Jayson T. Coté"
Hey Jeff, I have run into this syndication issue on several occasions and have tested many different variations from publishing all posts to one "mother' site in a WPMS environment and then sharing the posts with child or sub sites to utilizing various 'syndication' routines from plugins to even coding up an RSS routine.  I have settled on using the Autoblog plugin from WPMU.  It works very well and has the options I need.  That I would pass it on.  Hope this helps - https://premium.wpmudev.org/project/autoblog/

Kind Regards,
Jayson T. Coté | Chief Rainmaker | groundupmedia.com
w: 303.900.8825 | m: 303-910-8020 | Skype: jaysontcote


On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Xen <[hidden email]> wrote:

That seems pretty good, like, exactly the same thing as the Facebook "Graph" API.

But the only downside that you're making it extremely easy for anyone to gain this type of access, if you're not careful. Which is why I would be hesitant...

It's funny. The Facebook Graph API provides for less information than the regular web interface. And all those developers that want to use it, are complaining about that. For instance, you cannot even retrieve your own friendslist unless every one of your friends give you (or your app) permission to do so. Meanwhile, if you're willing to put in the effort, all of that information is easily 'grabbable'.

In any case, I understand your feeling, Jeff. You can get exhausted from trying things that don't ever seem to work. Jetpack is also not the most ...elegant or useful addition to the fleet. Suddenly you are mandated to install a 21 meg plugin that comes with a million features and requires a WP.com account to basically do anything, and that is actually not a plugin itself but a plugin framework within the plugin framework of WP.org. Personally, I intend to use it at some point, but I'm going to strip away the all-too-obvious "container" aspect to it at least in terms of the user interface (the word "Jetpack" is meaningless to me because it doesn't do anything useful; "stats" and "akismet" are not). And get rid of all the modules I don't use anyway, and will never use. After that it will just be a common library to the few 'modules' I do use :) :p.

Just giving it its proper position ;-).

When I read the page at http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/, I feel a lot of sadness. As if those developers that had once written those words with inspiration, are now feeling drained, as you do. The plugin was probably conceived as something relatively standalone. But today everything has come under a heavier wind and this wind is pushing forward in some sort of frenzy of WordPress.com integration of everything.

For example, one of the Jetpack advantages is listed as "if you let us do your statistics, it will not burden your own servers, but rather ours, that are extremely speedy." How one cloud-hosted server park can ever be faster than a local server is beyond me, unless you'd be talking about the caching advantages of webclients retrieving things like jQuery from centrally hosted locations (such as some Google server) instead of your site. But it is nonsensical to think that the computing power of millions of decentralized hosts would be dwarfed by a few centrally hosted server parks. And these guys think they are some kind of awesome. When you check the stats page of a newly configured stats counter or API key or whatever, you are greeted with the message "Whoa! Not so fast! We just started counting, there's nothing here yet, DUDE." Liberally cited, but still, that was the gist of the message. Completely inappropriate for something that is meant to be a serious, boring (but still exciting) "accounting" system. Suddenly we're all being turned into surfer dudes when really, we just wanted to check out how that page looked.

Jetpack is really not that cool. Not nearly as cool as they try to make it out to be..

So perhaps you're also feeling drained because that plugin you got excited about, it is really at a true 'dead end' or at least a 'not feeling it anymore' end.

So there's probably something that they're doing (or that someone is doing) that is more in line with 'the times' and it is just a matter of getting through the grief of having lost this old thing, so you can make room for the new thing and I'm sure it will soon fall into your hands, or cross paths with you...

It is just a bit of a feeling of depression I guess.. that I'm feeling right now..

Kudos,

Bart.



On Mon, 8 Sep 2014, James DiGioia wrote:

> It may be worth looking into the WP-API, which is the JSON api slated to go into core in 4.1 (I think). I haven't used it, but I think it will provide JSON endpoints withou requiring the Jetpack plugin, if you're looking to avoid that.
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Jeff Lambert <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Bart and Nikola.
>> Nikola - I’ll take a look at threewpbroadcast.
>> Bart - Probably am feeling defeated as I keep running into roadblocks on
>> this plugin and really don’t have the bandwidth, and likely the knowledge
>> to dig into the code.  I did a little looking around but think there are
>> things on the WP side I’m not aware of, especially given that it requires
>> JetPack be installed on the receiving site.  If you have thoughts on how
>> to get support, or engage someone to here to help make this plugin work,
>> I’m all ears.
>> Cheers,
>> Jeff
>> On 9/8/14, 1:15 AM, "Bart Schouten" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I can only say that to me, the first solution you envisioned sounds
>>> really
>>> inspired and creative and solid. But the alternative path you suggest
>>> after, sounds just like you're running out of time and you need a quicker
>>> solution.
>>>
>>> I do hope you will be able to find something that really satisfies you..
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Bart.
>>>
>>> ps. maybe you should push harder to get support on that plugin. I mean,
>>> wherever, in here, somewhere else. "unless someone here has some thoughts
>>> about it" is not a very invitational statement to make if you are looking
>>> for that kind of help. That's like admitting defeat before you've even
>>> asked anything...
>>>
>>> Anyway, good luck.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jeff Lambert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looking to see if anyone has ideas on the best approach to this
>>>> scenario:
>>>>
>>>> I have a client who has a couple of sites that we want to syndicate,
>>>> partly
>>>> through opening up a JSON tunnel and also by serving up a page within an
>>>> iframe on the subscriber¹s site.
>>>>
>>>> To get here my plan was to bring the content of our two sites together
>>>> and
>>>> syndicate the centrally managed content out to our two sites, as well
>>>> as to
>>>> those who sign up for our service.  This is the path I¹ve taken.
>>>>
>>>> In researching this awhile back I came across this offering by VIP
>>>> WordPress, http://vip.wordpress.com/plugins/syndication.  Perfect
>>>> solution,
>>>> so, I did some hunting and found there is a plugin, developed by
>>>> Automattic,
>>>> up on the plugin repository,
>>>> http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/.
>>>> While it hasn¹t been updated in awhile there were some answers to
>>>> somewhat
>>>> recent support topics and a reference to a more current version on
>>>> github,
>>>> which I¹m running.  Unfortunately, my support posts go unanswered and I
>>>> now
>>>> have run into a new issue and will likely not use this option anymore
>>>> unless
>>>> someone here has some thoughts about it.
>>>>
>>>> So, I¹m looking for suggestions on a different approach.  if I pull the
>>>> two
>>>> sites onto my multisite and run them as sub-sites, is there a good way
>>>> to
>>>> parse out the posts from the primary site to these sub-sites?  Anyone
>>>> done
>>>> this?  I¹m not worried about search engine hate as I¹ll be ³blocking²
>>>> the
>>>> search engines from my main content site and those who sign up for our
>>>> service are only displaying content on their Intranets.
>>>>
>>>> Specific info:
>>>>
>>>> Main content management site is:  http://accuranews.com
>>>>
>>>> Current site that I¹m trying to push content to:
>>>> http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com
>>>>
>>>> Future second site to push content to is:
>>>> http://www.thedieseldriver.com
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance for your help!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> wp-hackers mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers

_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

Xen
In reply to this post by Xen
On Mon, 8 Sep 2014, Xen wrote:

> That seems pretty good, like, exactly the same thing as the Facebook
> "Graph" API.


My apologies about this 'top-post', it was a bit unclear, but I was
responding to James...

> It may be worth looking into the WP-API, which is the JSON api slated to
> go into core in 4.1 (I think). I haven't used it, but I think it will
> provide JSON endpoints withou [sic] requiring the Jetpack plugin, if
> you're looking to avoid that.

By James DiGioia, Mon, 8 Sept 2014.


In any case, it has me thinking.. There is one bot in the crawlers to my
site I've been observing that gives me a really bad feeling. It is the
"meanpathbot". What the "meanpathbot" does is basically just steal all
your content, all your css, all your javascript, and then sell it to
researchers and journalists and the like who like to analyse that data to
their benefit.

Which could, for example, be sensitive content you removed at the perfect
time from your site so as to gain enough exposure for it, but not too
much.

It could be anything. And they try to archive it and then provide access
to all of it, to anyone who is willing to fork out the cash. Which starts
at $500 USD per month.

I am definitely going to block that one. But on the topic of public "REST"
APIs, if you allow your content (that is basically something you protect
and control its access paths to) to be retrieved by THIRD parties (like
Facebook does) but WITHOUT the representation you have so carefully chosen
(by designing your web interface) or that (in the case of Facebook) your
users may have carefully chosen so as to provide a certain feeling and a
certain integrity of what others see of you, within a certain access
domain ---

And now suddenly everyone and his green seamonkey can just press a button
and download it all, irrespective of who they are or where they are at...

I just say that that is something you need to carefully watch against.

Something becomes more valuable if a user/visitor/person has to put in a
bit of effort, such as taking the time to actually visit your site. Or to
get to know you. Or to first hear about you. Or to know where to look for
information. Or to be intrigued by what you offer and to seek more.

If you were to write a book, get it printed, and then give it away for
free, you will find 95% of it in the dustbins of the area where you have
been handing it out. People will take it off your hands, look at it for 2
seconds, get bored, and throw it away. That's just the way it goes..

So make sure you maintain the proper balance between what people are
getting from you, and what they are putting in themselves. That's just
what I'm trying to say.

Don't be a whore who trades something worthless for something equally
worthless. Your content is valuable. It has a price, a worth, a value. It
has seen effort. It has seen sweat. It has perhaps even seen a lot of
blood. Or even some tears as well.

So don't start giving it all away just because it could mean more exposure
of it. Don't be the one who gets rejected. Be the one who rejects.

Even if directly monetizing access is not your business model. Even if you
are not a business for money at all. There is still something you want, be
it a form of popularity, of being a popular place where people like to
hang out, a type of community centre, you are trying to be something
valuable as a result of the value you put onto your site so as you give
value to others, they give value to you because you become a source to
them of value. And the more people recognize you as a source of value to
them, the better it becomes for you, in all respects.

But that depends increasingly in this world on your ability to maintain
control over who sees what and how. And syndication to a controlled
netwerk of sites that agree with your vision is not a problem at all. But
take care to recognise what is "inner circle" and what belongs to the
"outer circle". The outer circle of you, the main public.

Personally I intend to put into my (very personal) site a form of
intrigue. Everything is in fact publically accessible (or most of it) but
I can give off the illusion that it is sacred or hidden material by
providing a sense of exclusivity to those who opt to become members. That
requires nothing more than that certain material will take more effort to
reach for those who are not members. For example, non-members will only
see the 5 most recent posts and will have to traverse categories to get to
the rest.

That's intriguing. It will give people the impression that I consider my
content valuable enough to restrict access to it, while not turning anyone
away if they want to put the value into it to get my value out.

So it is really an illusion of exclusivity when the site is all-inclusive.
But many commercial entities do the reverse: they provide an illusion of
inclusivity when in fact they are very exclusive, in the sense that you
can never become part of their inner circle. (Try to send an email to
Google technical support, if you could, if you dared, if you envisioned
the possibility of dreaming about that being within the realm of the
achievable.)

So don't be Google and don't be Facebook. Facebook at least has to
restrict access to almost everything since it is a persons site. WordPress
falls along the same lines as Facebook mostly... but since most content is
public to begin with, people running those public JSON webservices may end
up being among the likes of Google if they think people offloading their
data is a plus....

Regards,

Bart.


> But the only downside that you're making it extremely easy for anyone to
> gain this type of access, if you're not careful. Which is why I would be
> hesitant...
>
> It's funny. The Facebook Graph API provides for less information than the
> regular web interface. And all those developers that want to use it, are
> complaining about that. For instance, you cannot even retrieve your own
> friendslist unless every one of your friends give you (or your app)
> permission to do so. Meanwhile, if you're willing to put in the effort,
> all of that information is easily 'grabbable'.
>
> In any case, I understand your feeling, Jeff. You can get exhausted from
> trying things that don't ever seem to work. Jetpack is also not the most
> ...elegant or useful addition to the fleet. Suddenly you are mandated to
> install a 21 meg plugin that comes with a million features and requires a
> WP.com account to basically do anything, and that is actually not a plugin
> itself but a plugin framework within the plugin framework of WP.org.
> Personally, I intend to use it at some point, but I'm going to strip away
> the all-too-obvious "container" aspect to it at least in terms of the user
> interface (the word "Jetpack" is meaningless to me because it doesn't do
> anything useful; "stats" and "akismet" are not). And get rid of all the
> modules I don't use anyway, and will never use. After that it will just be
> a common library to the few 'modules' I do use :) :p.
>
> Just giving it its proper position ;-).
>
> When I read the page at http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/, I
> feel a lot of sadness. As if those developers that had once written those
> words with inspiration, are now feeling drained, as you do. The plugin was
> probably conceived as something relatively standalone. But today
> everything has come under a heavier wind and this wind is pushing forward
> in some sort of frenzy of WordPress.com integration of everything.
>
> For example, one of the Jetpack advantages is listed as "if you let us do
> your statistics, it will not burden your own servers, but rather ours,
> that are extremely speedy." How one cloud-hosted server park can ever be
> faster than a local server is beyond me, unless you'd be talking about the
> caching advantages of webclients retrieving things like jQuery from
> centrally hosted locations (such as some Google server) instead of your
> site. But it is nonsensical to think that the computing power of millions
> of decentralized hosts would be dwarfed by a few centrally hosted server
> parks. And these guys think they are some kind of awesome. When you check
> the stats page of a newly configured stats counter or API key or whatever,
> you are greeted with the message "Whoa! Not so fast! We just started
> counting, there's nothing here yet, DUDE." Liberally cited, but still,
> that was the gist of the message. Completely inappropriate for something
> that is meant to be a serious, boring (but still exciting) "accounting"
> system. Suddenly we're all being turned into surfer dudes when really, we
> just wanted to check out how that page looked.
>
> Jetpack is really not that cool. Not nearly as cool as they try to make it
> out to be..
>
> So perhaps you're also feeling drained because that plugin you got excited
> about, it is really at a true 'dead end' or at least a 'not feeling it
> anymore' end.
>
> So there's probably something that they're doing (or that someone is
> doing) that is more in line with 'the times' and it is just a matter of
> getting through the grief of having lost this old thing, so you can make
> room for the new thing and I'm sure it will soon fall into your hands, or
> cross paths with you...
>
> It is just a bit of a feeling of depression I guess.. that I'm feeling
> right now..
>
> Kudos,
>
> Bart.
>
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Syndication Input Sought

Jeff Lambert
Thanks everyone for your input. I¹ll be researching options soon. If
anyone has any other recommendations just let me know. Pros-and-Cons to
the various options but the REST APIs are, to me, the more strategic
approach but when I looked at them previously they weren¹t quite there,
which is why I was jazzed when I found the push syndication plugin until I
continually realized it was similar to a lot of projects that start out
hot-n-heavy and then fall a bit to the wayside.  Good comments on security
and other such things.

Cheers,

Jeff

On 9/8/14, 11:13 AM, "Bart Schouten" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>On Mon, 8 Sep 2014, Xen wrote:
>
>> That seems pretty good, like, exactly the same thing as the Facebook
>> "Graph" API.
>
>
>My apologies about this 'top-post', it was a bit unclear, but I was
>responding to James...
>
>> It may be worth looking into the WP-API, which is the JSON api slated
>>to
>> go into core in 4.1 (I think). I haven't used it, but I think it will
>> provide JSON endpoints withou [sic] requiring the Jetpack plugin, if
>> you're looking to avoid that.
>
>By James DiGioia, Mon, 8 Sept 2014.
>
>
>In any case, it has me thinking.. There is one bot in the crawlers to my
>site I've been observing that gives me a really bad feeling. It is the
>"meanpathbot". What the "meanpathbot" does is basically just steal all
>your content, all your css, all your javascript, and then sell it to
>researchers and journalists and the like who like to analyse that data to
>their benefit.
>
>Which could, for example, be sensitive content you removed at the perfect
>time from your site so as to gain enough exposure for it, but not too
>much.
>
>It could be anything. And they try to archive it and then provide access
>to all of it, to anyone who is willing to fork out the cash. Which starts
>at $500 USD per month.
>
>I am definitely going to block that one. But on the topic of public
>"REST"
>APIs, if you allow your content (that is basically something you protect
>and control its access paths to) to be retrieved by THIRD parties (like
>Facebook does) but WITHOUT the representation you have so carefully
>chosen
>(by designing your web interface) or that (in the case of Facebook) your
>users may have carefully chosen so as to provide a certain feeling and a
>certain integrity of what others see of you, within a certain access
>domain ---
>
>And now suddenly everyone and his green seamonkey can just press a button
>and download it all, irrespective of who they are or where they are at...
>
>I just say that that is something you need to carefully watch against.
>
>Something becomes more valuable if a user/visitor/person has to put in a
>bit of effort, such as taking the time to actually visit your site. Or to
>get to know you. Or to first hear about you. Or to know where to look for
>information. Or to be intrigued by what you offer and to seek more.
>
>If you were to write a book, get it printed, and then give it away for
>free, you will find 95% of it in the dustbins of the area where you have
>been handing it out. People will take it off your hands, look at it for 2
>seconds, get bored, and throw it away. That's just the way it goes..
>
>So make sure you maintain the proper balance between what people are
>getting from you, and what they are putting in themselves. That's just
>what I'm trying to say.
>
>Don't be a whore who trades something worthless for something equally
>worthless. Your content is valuable. It has a price, a worth, a value. It
>has seen effort. It has seen sweat. It has perhaps even seen a lot of
>blood. Or even some tears as well.
>
>So don't start giving it all away just because it could mean more
>exposure
>of it. Don't be the one who gets rejected. Be the one who rejects.
>
>Even if directly monetizing access is not your business model. Even if
>you
>are not a business for money at all. There is still something you want,
>be
>it a form of popularity, of being a popular place where people like to
>hang out, a type of community centre, you are trying to be something
>valuable as a result of the value you put onto your site so as you give
>value to others, they give value to you because you become a source to
>them of value. And the more people recognize you as a source of value to
>them, the better it becomes for you, in all respects.
>
>But that depends increasingly in this world on your ability to maintain
>control over who sees what and how. And syndication to a controlled
>netwerk of sites that agree with your vision is not a problem at all. But
>take care to recognise what is "inner circle" and what belongs to the
>"outer circle". The outer circle of you, the main public.
>
>Personally I intend to put into my (very personal) site a form of
>intrigue. Everything is in fact publically accessible (or most of it) but
>I can give off the illusion that it is sacred or hidden material by
>providing a sense of exclusivity to those who opt to become members. That
>requires nothing more than that certain material will take more effort to
>reach for those who are not members. For example, non-members will only
>see the 5 most recent posts and will have to traverse categories to get
>to
>the rest.
>
>That's intriguing. It will give people the impression that I consider my
>content valuable enough to restrict access to it, while not turning
>anyone
>away if they want to put the value into it to get my value out.
>
>So it is really an illusion of exclusivity when the site is
>all-inclusive.
>But many commercial entities do the reverse: they provide an illusion of
>inclusivity when in fact they are very exclusive, in the sense that you
>can never become part of their inner circle. (Try to send an email to
>Google technical support, if you could, if you dared, if you envisioned
>the possibility of dreaming about that being within the realm of the
>achievable.)
>
>So don't be Google and don't be Facebook. Facebook at least has to
>restrict access to almost everything since it is a persons site.
>WordPress
>falls along the same lines as Facebook mostly... but since most content
>is
>public to begin with, people running those public JSON webservices may
>end
>up being among the likes of Google if they think people offloading their
>data is a plus....
>
>Regards,
>
>Bart.
>
>
>> But the only downside that you're making it extremely easy for anyone
>>to
>> gain this type of access, if you're not careful. Which is why I would
>>be
>> hesitant...
>>
>> It's funny. The Facebook Graph API provides for less information than
>>the
>> regular web interface. And all those developers that want to use it,
>>are
>> complaining about that. For instance, you cannot even retrieve your own
>> friendslist unless every one of your friends give you (or your app)
>> permission to do so. Meanwhile, if you're willing to put in the effort,
>> all of that information is easily 'grabbable'.
>>
>> In any case, I understand your feeling, Jeff. You can get exhausted
>>from
>> trying things that don't ever seem to work. Jetpack is also not the
>>most
>> ...elegant or useful addition to the fleet. Suddenly you are mandated
>>to
>> install a 21 meg plugin that comes with a million features and requires
>>a
>> WP.com account to basically do anything, and that is actually not a
>>plugin
>> itself but a plugin framework within the plugin framework of WP.org.
>> Personally, I intend to use it at some point, but I'm going to strip
>>away
>> the all-too-obvious "container" aspect to it at least in terms of the
>>user
>> interface (the word "Jetpack" is meaningless to me because it doesn't
>>do
>> anything useful; "stats" and "akismet" are not). And get rid of all the
>> modules I don't use anyway, and will never use. After that it will just
>>be
>> a common library to the few 'modules' I do use :) :p.
>>
>> Just giving it its proper position ;-).
>>
>> When I read the page at http://wordpress.org/plugins/push-syndication/,
>>I
>> feel a lot of sadness. As if those developers that had once written
>>those
>> words with inspiration, are now feeling drained, as you do. The plugin
>>was
>> probably conceived as something relatively standalone. But today
>> everything has come under a heavier wind and this wind is pushing
>>forward
>> in some sort of frenzy of WordPress.com integration of everything.
>>
>> For example, one of the Jetpack advantages is listed as "if you let us
>>do
>> your statistics, it will not burden your own servers, but rather ours,
>> that are extremely speedy." How one cloud-hosted server park can ever
>>be
>> faster than a local server is beyond me, unless you'd be talking about
>>the
>> caching advantages of webclients retrieving things like jQuery from
>> centrally hosted locations (such as some Google server) instead of your
>> site. But it is nonsensical to think that the computing power of
>>millions
>> of decentralized hosts would be dwarfed by a few centrally hosted
>>server
>> parks. And these guys think they are some kind of awesome. When you
>>check
>> the stats page of a newly configured stats counter or API key or
>>whatever,
>> you are greeted with the message "Whoa! Not so fast! We just started
>> counting, there's nothing here yet, DUDE." Liberally cited, but still,
>> that was the gist of the message. Completely inappropriate for
>>something
>> that is meant to be a serious, boring (but still exciting) "accounting"
>> system. Suddenly we're all being turned into surfer dudes when really,
>>we
>> just wanted to check out how that page looked.
>>
>> Jetpack is really not that cool. Not nearly as cool as they try to make
>>it
>> out to be..
>>
>> So perhaps you're also feeling drained because that plugin you got
>>excited
>> about, it is really at a true 'dead end' or at least a 'not feeling it
>> anymore' end.
>>
>> So there's probably something that they're doing (or that someone is
>> doing) that is more in line with 'the times' and it is just a matter of
>> getting through the grief of having lost this old thing, so you can
>>make
>> room for the new thing and I'm sure it will soon fall into your hands,
>>or
>> cross paths with you...
>>
>> It is just a bit of a feeling of depression I guess.. that I'm feeling
>> right now..
>>
>> Kudos,
>>
>> Bart.
>>
>_______________________________________________
>wp-hackers mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers


_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers