Alright, thanks. I'll try to upgrade to 3.04 again. I suppose that when the time comes GIJOE will have hacks and instructions for the new version ready as well (if they will be different) for reapplying so yeah..

I've just read the 2.3/2.4 roadmap and have a bit better understanding of where it is going. Essentially it's taking a step back after taking an approach that didn't work and redoing it hopefully right this time, from 2.0.x to 2.3 (dev) to final 2.4.

Well that sounds good and if it'll be ready in 2 months (give or take) that's alright as well considering that time passes so fast to me lately two months are nothing. (I mean, I've had my site on 2.2.4 now for probably six months already ).

I guess I'll take this road of least resistance (compared to the drupal switch and all risks/troubles that could bring) and give XOOPS a second chance.

Thanks

Daniel.

Hmm.. well the site is more or less working alright on 2.2.4 so maybe you guys are right. But when is the 2.4 release due to happen, at least as a rough estimate?

Also it's a good idea about upgrading existing modules. I have actually tried to upgrade CBB already but ran into some problems (blank pages) and reversed as soon as I could not having enough time (and downtime) to sacrifice for troubleshooting). Maybe I need to upgrade one minor CBB version at a time?

Btw, one thing I forgot to mention is that I am using a couple of important hacks by GIJOE; the autologin hack and the shorturl's hack which also need to work on whatever I am going to upgrade or downgrade to.

Thanks guys for your support.

Daniel

Quote:

Well that's good to hear.

Quote:

I am actually aware of that downgrade script, but since I am currently using quite a few modules I am worried that the downgrade will make them incompatible and if there are no downgrade scripts for these specific module databases then it's hard to get the content from 2.2 modules working in 2.0.13.2. But I'll have to test this I suppose.

The modules I use and need are CBB2.3, Private Messaging and profile modules (which come with XOOPS 2.2), SmartSection 1.1, SmartFAQ 1.0.4, MultiMenu 1.74, PiCal 0.82, MyAlbum-P 2.84, News 1.42, XPress 1.5 and WebLinks 0.93.

I posted that just so if anyone has used them on 2.2 and downgraded succesfully can share their experience. I'd appreciate it.

Also thanks snow77 and gestroud for your replies. Regarding modules for XOOPS I don't really need much more than I mentioned above and some of the new features I plan to implement on my site could probably well be done using an existing module, but compared to Drupal, for example, and its extensibility, I think gestroud is right that XOOPS does probably lack behind a bit in certain ways.

Anyway, if I could succesfully pull a downgrade that will make the final decision on wether to stay or go much easier. So I'll have to try that and then see if I like what I see enough to stick with XOOPS.

Thank you
Daniel

That's the biggest question for me at this point in time.

I am one of those who is currently stuck on the 2.2.4 version of XOOPS which is apparently no longer officially supported and recommended.

I am aware that the blame for this situation partly falls on me for upgrading to the 2.2.x branch early, but I think that some part of the blame now evidently falls on XOOPS Project as well. What is happening recently is that XOOPS is practically giving up on 2.2, essentially marking it as a mistake, and moving on with the old 2.0.x branch. How else am I to interpret this than a realization of the wrong path and the late fix.

I don't nor should hold any grudges towards XOOPS for that though. I know the mantra. It's an "open source" project, people work for free etc. etc. even though I think some professionality is to be expected from a project that is now a real organization (XOOPS Foundation). Some responsibility is still carried.

Anyway, I have been considering a switch of my site to Drupal. One of the biggest reasons is simply lack of confidence in the future of XOOPS. What if the 2.2.x fiasco repeats itself again? Will XOOPS project finally have a long term stability and direction we all need? Does XOOPS have a good future or are we still in for surprises?

Have there been any steps made towards preventing similar problems happening in the future?

I am not saying all this to put anyone down. I am merely observing the situation as I see it and trying to decide wether to stick with XOOPS or move on to something like Drupal. I am trying to make the best choice here and I am hoping that your feedback will be of some help.

Some good points favoring the XOOPS option are:

1) The latest 2.0.14 release indicating that there is an active development of a well working branch

2) Skalpa's promise for a "downgrade" script in a future release for 2.2.4 users:
Quote:

3) My familiarity with XOOPS and the fact that sticking with XOOPS means preserving old URL's on the site, and putting less risk of data loss due to conversion (there aren't really all that reliable conversion options to Drupal actually).

However some points against XOOPS are:

1) Doubt about the future of XOOPS

2) Drupal appeal regarding some technical issues. Drupal extensibility and customizability definitely exceeds one of XOOPS.

3) The fact that Drupal has a solid base for an incresingly bright future which gives confidence.


So what are your thoughts? Have you found yourself in a similar situation? What have you ultimately decided? What would your suggestions be (if any)?

I appreciate any feedback.

Thank you
Daniel

Yes, I just installed sitemap and I love it. Goodbye to the old sitemap page that I never updated so it wasn't much of a map. This one does everything for me.

The peak.ne.jp/xoops and GIJOE are absolutely awesome. There is so many great modules and hacks there.

EDIT: Oh, and I currently have 26 installed modules. (had to go with the topic)

Thank you
Daniel

Guess what! The problem is solved! But not until I practically deleted the whole site and started all over, restored the profile related database tables for a few times, messed with xoops_newblock table for some odd reason of c_type structure column missing (something obviously totally unrelated). In the end it turned out that Gravies was right and that I just didn't pick up a message quite well and wondered around instead.

What I mean is this. What finally solved the problem was checking the last entries in the xoops_user_profile module. As it appears, every times me or anyone else tried to register it created a yet another pretty much empty entry with the "posts" column filled with "-1". So, even if I restored the xoops_user_profile_field table, and any other related table for that matter as well as deleted the c_templates files it didn't solve the problem as those trash entries went in the way somehow. Deleting them solved the problem.

I wasted quite alot of time rebuilding my site from scratch (from db backup of course) and I should have probably lost alot less of time over this if I only figured to look into the end of the xoops_user_profiles table. Gravies mentioned something like that on IRC, but I thought he was talking about deleting those users from the XOOPS user admin area (with the status of "-1"). Well, I obviously misread him.

All in all, I am very happy to have this problem solved and that I can again welcome new users to my site. And the time I lost rebuilding the site wasn't really for nothing. The "recent blog entries" block that cause 500 internal server error was solved as well and I took the chance while I was at rebuilding to port my content from buggy wfsections 2.01 module to awesome new smartsection 1.1 beta for 2.2. It works like a charm.

Anyway, before I stop ranting here is one error I am still getting in MySQL debug when deleting users (which could possibly cause some trouble and should thus be killed ASAP):

Quote:

As you can see it's in "Queries module" section of the debug window and the error is in bold text.

According to the error it is in MySQL syntax and causes the inability to delete an user entry from xoops_user_profile table.

That is why I had to manually delete those bad registration profiles from it to resolve the above problem.

Extended profiles module of both 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 XOOPS is obviously still buggy. I hope the next release is finally "ironed out".

Thank you
Daniel

Quote:

Or "Xoops I did it again"

Seriously though, I believe Mith and others deserve more respect then they are sometimes getting in comments from some people. I mean, there's a good deal of people that say good thing, but there's as much of others who aren't exactly giving constructive criticism, but just plain rude criticism. I just hope such behaviour doesn't turn developers motivation down.

On a bright note, there's alot of people who, despite all the problems we run into, all the quite madness outbursts caused by sites which all of a sudden don't work, keep their respect at the level. Also, people like Mith obviously love what they do, why would they do that for such a long time and so intensively otherwise.

Cheers all
(and hopes up for that extended profiles module fix(can't register new user))

Daniel

Quote:

I use Kate to edit those files and it is known not to add any "garbage" to the file being edited. I also checked for the spaces you mentioned and everything is as it's supposed to be.

Quote:

You're lucky, but that fixes nothing, at least for me. I never deleted those fields and the only change I actually did was to add Jabber text field and enable disclaimer on the registration page. Well, I disabled both now and the problem stays.

We're all playing guessing games inhere. Some are lucky like gravies (for reason beyond understanding) and some are still running in circles like us waiting for one of the Gods (read: core developers) to show up and bless us all.

Hope it'll be soon.

Thank you
Daniel

I know about that fix as I applied it. It fixes the problem I had before this one, not accepting passwords longer shorter than three characters even when user enters longer.

That fix solved that "three characters" problem, but also introduced this new "can't register new user" problem.

Is it only me having this problem after that fix? What, libervis is a ghost site?

Hah..

Well, it is GNU/Linux, yes. It is not on a local server, but on one by the hosting provider which, if I am not wrong, runs RedHat.

Permissions are usually automatically left right and unmodified as I upload stuff directly from the tarball to the server using krusader file manager/ftp client. I also checked now and permissions seem to be fine. I somehow don't think it is an issue with that.

I'll give it a more thorough check though, just to be sure, but I think it might be something else.

Thanks for the suggestion though (and cheers for Arch, a great distro! ;)

Daniel