19 replies to this topic

[Randy]

Please participate in this poll!

Edited by Jelmer, 12 March 2007 - 05:31 PM.

[Dean]

Only developers could see it in the Cocoon Development Thread - moved to Announcements.

[Randy]

Thanks, Is there a way to edit the poll? I just noticed I left out 4.0

[Jelmer]

Poll updated...

[Randy]

Thanks Jelmer!

[PaulD]

In case this is a poll to make decisions about future versions of Etomite, may I say that users like myself have no control over the MYSQL version used by my host. I can request an update, but it will only be done if enough users request it. (Probably only if they want to after that.)

I use 5.0 and have voted already.

Apparantly PHP 5 has some really cool functions and my host 'apparently' supports it. However when I tried to use achievo (open source collaboration) I could not get it to work. It required php 5.

Along the same lines, if eto required Mys1ql 5.1, then I would be unable to upgrade.

For developers, it must be very frustrating catering for us less 'well endowed' users.

Paul.

[Ralph]

While some users may not be in control of what versions of specific packages are installed on the hosting servers, it is still a necessity for developers of packages, like Etomite, to find a happy medium in regards to the minimum level of software requirements... If it weren't for this balance then no softwares would ever be updated and we'd all be be stuck where we were decades ago... Rest assured that it will be a while before Etomite will have a PHP 5 minimum requirement - but at the same time we do have to up our minimum requirement in an effort to deliver new and improved features to the vast majority of users... If, unfortunately, we happen to out-pace the capabilities of a sparse few users as the project evolves it would be no less a matter of logistics than having to upgrade your PC to run Windows Vista, for example... If you can't do it, you're SOL... Our goal in running this poll is to keep such attrition rates to a bare minimum...

[Randy]

Hi Paul,

Sounds like you're right in there with MySQL 5.0 (( and likely a late edition of PHP 4)) - this is quite mainstream.

The intent is to capture the situations exactly like yours.

The goal is to have an idea of the least common denominator. Then develop to that if it is reasonable to do so.

===
IMHO, it is not reasonable to develop anything 'new' for a target architecture that is obsolete. I believe folks less fortunate than Paul do have a way to change. Especially if you're working with an ISP that is using unsecured, low performance and obsolete products. They probably don't do backups or answer support requests either. You get my point.
===

[mikef]

As I thought, I can only vote once, though my sites are hosted in more than one place, with differing versions of MySQL.

I've voted for 4.1 as that is used by the host for most of my sites, but one resides on a server with 3.23 (or at least it had, last time it caused a problem for me ...)
However, that host is my ISP, and the first time I tried to build a site was using the 'free' hosting service my ISP offered me. These free services are likely to get left behind, but they are also likely to be the first place someone tries to build a website. If someone's first attempt doesn't work with etomite, they're likely to look elsewhere ...

[Randy]

Hi Mike,

Quote

If someone's first attempt doesn't work with etomite, they're likely to look elsewhere ...

To be sure, Etomite publishes minimum requirements...right here: http://docs.etomite.com/GetReady.html

There are still people trying to get Windows 95 to work, and people trying to run Windows Vista on a Pentium III with 256MB of RAM too.

I can only fall back to MHO, if folks go elsewhere because they cannot meet the minimum requirements to operate Etomite properly...uh, bye. Harsh? Sure. The question comes down to who you're going to volunteer your time to help. Those who drive innovation and continuous modernization (like you! ), or those who don't know or care enough to realize they too have a participant's role in this phenomena called the software community . Even 'newbs' can read...if they choose. I like helping participants...even if the only participation they could muster was to read the docs.

[cathode]

4.1.21

[Ralph]

cathode, on Mar 16 2007, 08:37 AM, said:

4.1.21

That would fall under 4.1

[mikef]

When were those requirements added to the documentation?

Where was an announcement made in the forum that a change in the minimum requirements had been made, and that support for earlier versions would be withdrawn with future versions?

Many current participants probably haven't read the docs, because for a prolonged period the docs were pretty meaningless, being incomplete and written for a version that was already obsolete at the time.

Whats the point of a survey asking people whether they are using versions of MySQL that are already below the minimum requirements for running etomite ... or is that not really the case?

[Dean]

We are prepping for 0.6.1.4 - the finishing touches are going on it

The announcement was gonna be made over the next few days (as well as the timeframe for 0614 release) - it wasn't meant to be spotted yet :-)
If I didn't make the doc site change a couple of days ago, I'd have forgotton And then we'd have had people saying "well the doc site still says mysql 3.x compatible!"

mikef, on Mar 16 2007, 08:57 PM, said:

When were those requirements added to the documentation?

A couple of days ago

Quote

Where was an announcement made in the forum that a change in the minimum requirements had been made, and that support for earlier versions would be withdrawn with future versions?

A couple of days into the future

Quote

Many current participants probably haven't read the docs, because for a prolonged period the docs were pretty meaningless, being incomplete and written for a version that was already obsolete at the time.

The documentation is always being tweaked, with new stuff being planned (now) for the documentation as the next version is prepared..

Quote

Whats the point of a survey asking people whether they are using versions of MySQL that are already below the minimum requirements for running etomite ... or is that not really the case?

It was only made apparent a couple of days ago that we would need to drop MySQL 3.x support in order to add new stuff in

[elephant]

Dean, on Mar 17 2007, 09:18 AM, said:

We are prepping for 0.6.1.4 - the finishing touches are going on it

The announcement was gonna be made over the next few days (as well as the timeframe for 0614 release) - it wasn't meant to be spotted yet :-)
If I didn't make the doc site change a couple of days ago, I'd have forgotton And then we'd have had people saying "well the doc site still says mysql 3.x compatible!"
A couple of days ago
A couple of days into the future
The documentation is always being tweaked, with new stuff being planned (now) for the documentation as the next version is prepared..
It was only made apparent a couple of days ago that we would need to drop MySQL 3.x support in order to add new stuff in

As per PaulD, my webhost does not entertain requests to upgrade php/mySQL.

They are currently offering mySQL 3.23, which I have never had trouble running ETO on.

What are the new features that require minimum mySQL 4.x ?

Can they be made optional ?

[mikef]

I can understand (and support) making changes to the requirements for the next major version (coccoon?). Making a change in requirements for a patch-level release however will cause problems for some current users (as above) and makes Randy's comparison with changes in requirements for new Microsoft operating systems even more of a nonsense ... Microsoft as far I know never knowingly released a patch to their operating systems or other software that caused it not to work on machines that previously worked.

In my opinion:
- bug/security fixes should continue to work in the environment that was originally required for the release.
- if new features require a different requirement, its time to start a beta or preview process for a new version, either 0.6.2 or coccoon, and put the new features in there.

[Cris D.]

Although I voted for SQL ver. 4 (my host) I also use XXAMP for testing which currently offers 3.2.

[Ralph]

The issues presented are being addressed... What we may do, although I haven't bounced this off Randy as yet, is to do some version checks so we can provide new techniques for newer releases while having backwards compatibility until our next major release...

What I would like everyone to take into consideration is that with technologies advancing at such a high rate of speed that it can sometimes be difficult to balance new and improved features while still taking legacy functionality into account... Sooner or later we can't have it both ways... What you will see is that the current Prelude code base will be parked in a "maintenance mode only" status with no further enhancements, regardless of who wants what... Any enhancements would be put into the next major release only and users would simply have to wait... The only alternative would be along the lines of individualized customizations, probably in the form of paid customizations due to the amount of time it takes not only to write the customizations but also accounting for the time that doing so draws from working on new code...

Now everyone knows why we, at one time, stated that the wish list is closed for discussion... Until we get our heads firmly rooted in the new overall code base it doesn't do much good to keep asking for more and more... Let us get the capabilities in there which will enable us to more readily provide all of the future "I wants"... We don't need each and every individual "I want" in order to make that happen, trust me...

[Ralph]

Cris D., on Mar 17 2007, 07:49 AM, said:

Although I voted for SQL ver. 4 (my host) I also use XXAMP for testing which currently offers 3.2.

To the best of my knowledge, Etomite never did openly state that it supported MySQL < 4.0 although it does appear to...

[Dean]

Yeah, the documentation said it did for some reason