SMF 2.0 Release Candidate 3 is out!

Started by Aaron, March 08, 2010, 06:03:11 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Forbs


Arantor

Owdy: You know as well as anyone that it's when it's done. Can't you just be happy for them to have gotten this far, since it's a sign of moving forwards?

AndreT

Stop creating drama and being so all sarcastic over the stuff. Sure, you're not some fancy rank anymore and your whole group of people don't like the people who lead SMF, but seriously, who gives a ******.

Afro

Vbgamer is pretty fast in updating his mods to RC3
Thanks guy

same to Labradoodle-360
AND Arantor..
weldone guys

[unplugged]

They are on top of things!

Also, many of the mods install just fine by emulating RC2.

Thanks again to all involved.
« Next Edit: Tomorrow at 08:34:45 PM by SunKing »   <---- « someone stole my sig... :o »



Nao 尚

Quote from: Afro on March 10, 2010, 12:29:23 PM
Vbgamer is pretty fast in updating his mods to RC3
Did they need any updating in the first place...?
Apart from the title_bar and cat_bar change, I don't see what else needs being checked...
To mod authors: just make sure the 2.0 install script uses range "2.0-2.99.99", so that any future version will be accepted without changes.
I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered.

Aeva Media rocks your life.

青山 素子

Quote from: Nao on March 10, 2010, 02:17:14 PM
To mod authors: just make sure the 2.0 install script uses range "2.0-2.99.99", so that any future version will be accepted without changes.

I actually recommend using "2.0, 2.0.* to cover updates. Any SMF 2.1 will likely be incompatible with 2.0 mods. Likewise, I'm going to hold off on wildcarding until 2.0 is declared stable.
Motoko-chan
Director, Simple Machines

Note: Unless otherwise stated, my posts are not representative of any official position or opinion of Simple Machines.


Afro

Quote from: Nao on March 10, 2010, 02:17:14 PM
Quote from: Afro on March 10, 2010, 12:29:23 PM
Vbgamer is pretty fast in updating his mods to RC3
Did they need any updating in the first place...?
Apart from the title_bar and cat_bar change, I don't see what else needs being checked...
To mod authors: just make sure the 2.0 install script uses range "2.0-2.99.99", so that any future version will be accepted without changes.
good one Nao..

MultiformeIngegno

Quote from: Nao on March 10, 2010, 02:17:14 PM
To mod authors: just make sure the 2.0 install script uses range "2.0-2.99.99", so that any future version will be accepted without changes.
...and don't forget to update the uninstall list too!! :P
RockCiclopedia (wiki - forum), Tutta la storia del rock, scritta da voi ...
Rimanere aggiornati sul mondo della musica grazie al nuovo feed "RockCiclopedia Music News"!

Norv

Quote from: Motoko-chan on March 10, 2010, 02:40:51 PM
Quote from: Nao on March 10, 2010, 02:17:14 PM
To mod authors: just make sure the 2.0 install script uses range "2.0-2.99.99", so that any future version will be accepted without changes.

I actually recommend using "2.0, 2.0.* to cover updates. Any SMF 2.1 will likely be incompatible with 2.0 mods. Likewise, I'm going to hold off on wildcarding until 2.0 is declared stable.

I'd prefer something like

<install for="2.0 RC1.2, 2.0 RC2, 2.0 RC3">
[...] // installation xmls

and

<install for="2.0 - 2.99.99">
<readme type="inline" parsebbc="true">[color=red]This mod has not been tested on your version of SMF.
It might work, or not. If you have errors, do not continue unless you know for sure what you are doing.[/color]</readme>
[...] // installation xmls


It would install just the same on present and future versions (or try to), but it would also tell the users that you didn't test it yet. (when you do, you could adjust what's included in the first one, and only the 2.0 versions not included in the first one would get the warning)
To-do lists are for deferral. The more things you write down the later they're done... until you have 100s of lists of things you don't do.

File a security report | Developers' Blog | Bug Tracker


Also known as Norv on D* | Norv N. on G+ | Norv on Github

Nao 尚

#190
Quote from: Motoko-chan on March 10, 2010, 02:40:51 PM
I actually recommend using "2.0, 2.0.* to cover updates.
I think they're covered by 2.0-2.99.99...?
I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered.

Aeva Media rocks your life.

Afro

Nao, you media installed without updates.
weldone

Arantor

Nao: 2.0 - 2.99.99 isn't quite the same thing. You're implying it will work on any 2.x, not just 2.0.x, which will cause issues when 2.1 occurs.

There is much frustration in the air still, but even with that, why lash out? There's no need for it, especially as he's moved on by his own admission. Either let it go, or get involved in fixing it, don't just whine about it.

青山 素子

Quote from: Nao on March 10, 2010, 04:36:41 PM
Quote from: Motoko-chan on March 10, 2010, 02:40:51 PM
I actually recommend using "2.0, 2.0.* to cover updates.
I think they're covered by 2.0-2.99.99...?

Your range would also cover 2.1, which would likely be incompatible with mods unless it was the smallest of edits. There is/was also a weird bug where ranges like 1.0.9-1.0.99 break. I just usually prefer the asterisk because of that.


Quote from: Arantor on March 10, 2010, 04:49:59 PM
Either let it go, or get involved in fixing it, don't just whine about it.

Exactly. Devolving into a person who makes random snips is just unproductive, bad for one's health, and a waste of time.
Motoko-chan
Director, Simple Machines

Note: Unless otherwise stated, my posts are not representative of any official position or opinion of Simple Machines.


Nao 尚

I see what you mean... And I didn't see a problem in that in order to install 2.1, one would have to reinstall all mods anyway (it's not a patch upgrade, it's a major upgrade that requires overwriting files.) In which case, if reinstalling the mod over it doesn't work, yes, it needs updating -- but in the unlikely case that it does work, it saves me the need to update the file at all ;)
I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered.

Aeva Media rocks your life.

Lazarus_Long

Okay,
My server crashed and after many years of a given message board I'm looking at a change.  SM seems interesting but two problems:
First - This place's comments seem to indicate it may not be a stable organization! Why should anyone add the SM message board when the site's own boards show so much in-fighting and animosity??
Second -  If I were to decide to go with SM, how difficult will the migration from 1.x to 2.x be?  Is it worth messing with right now?

Arantor

Lazarus_Long: Well... there has been fighting, but in any sizeable organisation that's been around years, you'll get that. It just means that all concerned want what's best and have different ideas on how that should be achieved.

The migration from 1.x to 2.x is straightforward enough provided that you can find suitable mod and theme replacements that suit - not all 1.x mods work on 2.x and similar for themes. Additionally most themes that predate 2.0 RC2 will need major work to update.

Personally I think 2.0 RC3 is stable enough for most forums now.

[unplugged]

Same here. I uploaded all of the files from RC3 (overwriting what was there), ran upgrade.php, reinstalled mods (having to emulate RC2 for some, and manual edits for a few). Done. Quite smooth and headache free.
« Next Edit: Tomorrow at 08:34:45 PM by SunKing »   <---- « someone stole my sig... :o »



MarcusJ

Quote from: Lazarus_Long on March 10, 2010, 06:57:40 PM
First - This place's comments seem to indicate it may not be a stable organization! Why should anyone add the SM message board when the site's own boards show so much in-fighting and animosity??

I can only guess, but I would assume that it was brought into the open because it was already there anyway.  I agree with Arantor.  Any large organization with passionate people at the helm will have to endure some contention.

On the bright side, it would seem the worst is over.  RC3 was released this week.  Many of the mod authors have jumped back into action.  I had my forums using RC3 and all the mods I use were updated in less than 24 hours.  Heck even a couple mods that had been archived were brought up to date.  (Ones I had been silently waiting for)

QuoteSecond -  If I were to decide to go with SM, how difficult will the migration from 1.x to 2.x be?  Is it worth messing with right now?

Quote from: Arantor on March 10, 2010, 06:59:53 PM
Personally I think 2.0 RC3 is stable enough for most forums now.
^^ I agree ^^ I'm using RC3 on live sites.  I couldn't be happier. 

If I were going to migrate from another forum to SMF, I'd go straight for 2.0. 

Eudemon

smf is a wonderful forum software
thx to all staff
im going to upgrade my rc2 to rc3

Advertisement: