Quote::

The core is ready to handle this but modules and 3rd party developers are not yet.

Just let us know what needs to be done ahead of time, then we can be ready with new versions just after the release.

For me it's no problem to break modules for new core functionality provided you tell us all up front what is happening and what we need to do. It's only an issue if the changes are unannounced and undocumented because that makes it very frustrating to sort out at the last minute.

If you say, in version x.x all modules will have to have such and such a thing which is like this and function yyy will be changed like so. and we expect version x.x to be released in 2 or 3 months then developers can get on and make the modules work and test them with CVS ahead of the release. That way we all are working together and the excitement of a new version will be big news with everyone looking forward to new faster modules as well as a new core.

This also encourages mod devs to use new methods and site admins to take the upgrades, neither of which seem to have happened much with 9.1.x (not like 8.2b -> 9.0.x anyway).

Oh yea DF Rocks

Had a look at the topic here

dragonflycms.org/Forum...20688.html

Seems like things are taking place at really fast pace here at DF nowadays!

Ok one small question here. Does this mean that the question of module compatibilty will be out of the picture for good and all the 3rd party modules will be automatically be upgraded with every upgrade of the DF installation?

Dizfunkshunal wrote:

PartyMarty wrote: I am seriously considering moving onto Joomla. Send us a post card!

bigern75 wrote:

See, this attitude towards others in the community is what has sunken this place to an all time low. btw, I wont troll around this hell hole anymore, again. I'll just troll around my own hole over at dfaddons. adious once again amigos!

NanoCaiordo wrote:

I do 100% agree with all DF staff comments. As DragonflyCMS staff, my opinion shouldn't even be considered because I do of course 'work' here...

What a fascist boss you have, Nano. Eep.

Otherwise, I suppose I agree. I'm a noob, so what do I know. (you don't know yet.)

Melinda wrote:

Chit Chat wrote: Ehm yeah, who will create the most useless topic?

BrokenCrust wrote:

NanoCaiordo wrote: The core is ready to handle this but modules and 3rd party developers are not yet. Just let us know what needs to be done ahead of time, then we can be ready with new versions just after the release. For me it's no problem to break modules for new core functionality provided you tell us all up front what is happening and what we need to do. It's only an issue if the changes are unannounced and undocumented because that makes it very frustrating to sort out at the last minute.

That's a dangerous line of reasoning. Look back to what NanoCaiordo was saying 3rd party developers aren't ready for:

NanoCaiordo wrote:

...upgrade core and ANY 3rd party modules with just one click!

To me, that sounds like, if done incorrectly (too soon, or with a series of hacks), it could break anything and everything. I'm glad that the core development team thinks it's a problem to break modules.

It is probably only ok to severely cripple existing popular modules when the function of that module is being included or replaced by the core function that's breaking it. Or, as you did point out, if the change is made in a controlled fashion... which is what happens now, from what I've seen.

Both of our opinions on that, however, are moot! We lack the subjectivity necessary to know, for instance, the database query that, if changed today in CVS by Developer X, will creatively destroy previously working modules that aren't installed (except intentionally) in a CVS build. That's not going to show up in documentation... a developer will experience or anticipate the 'creative breakage'. NanoCaiordo has effectively shown us that they might be anticipating such a screw-up, and so, are moving purposefully in their work.

They are avoiding the dangerous reasoning, that it's ok to break the community's work, just to move the core version number higher.

I do agree, however, that these boards are full of examples of short tempered responses. Again, I'm a noob here, but I can't help but notice a stressed/stressful tone/attitude in many threads. FYI only.

Quote::

What a fascist boss you have, Nano. Eep.

What does the Eep mean?

whatrevolution wrote:

Again, I'm a noob here, but I can't help but notice a stressed/stressful tone/attitude in many threads. FYI only.

You just made one

NanoCaiordo wrote:

whatrevolution wrote: Again, I'm a noob here, but I can't help but notice a stressed/stressful tone/attitude in many threads. FYI only. You just made one

DJ Maze wrote:

NanoCaiordo wrote: whatrevolution wrote: Again, I'm a noob here, but I can't help but notice a stressed/stressful tone/attitude in many threads. FYI only. You just made one

WebSiteGuru wrote:

DJ Maze wrote: NanoCaiordo wrote: whatrevolution wrote: Again, I'm a noob here, but I can't help but notice a stressed/stressful tone/attitude in many threads. FYI only. You just made one

hmm, another trolling comment, and it worked - why can't people just stick to relevant comments on the subject like previous posters.

Forum description says it all.

Better things to do than waste server space with it - locked.

---

Yes, it is worthwhile - there is, and has been for quite some time, a roadmap, and the journey is addressed in the CVS Info forum. There have been some bumps and potholes along the road which have slowed progress but the engine is now chugging along smoothly.

There is also planned life beyond the existing roadmap.