Random Image
The Future of Gallery 1
Submitted by Tim_j on Mon, 2007-04-16 19:12
A few months back we released a preview for Gallery 1.6. This contained many new features including access keys, a template system, captcha support, and group support but it also is a dramatic change in the code and layout handling. To this date we have received almost no feedback on these new features. Without any feedback, it is hard for us to know if it still makes sense for us to release Gallery 1.6, especially in light of the fact that it is significantly different from Gallery 1.5. Please read on!
The upside of Gallery 1.6 is that you get all of these new features in a Gallery that doesn't require a database. It continues to be an easy upgrade path from existing Gallery 1 installs with the same system requirements, and the code is much cleaner and more organized making customizations easier. The downside is that users with a modified version 1.5.x or prior would have to do all of their modifications again.
So, we're asking all of you for your opinion on Gallery 1:
- How do you see the future of Gallery 1.x?
- Do you think we should release Gallery 1.6? Why or why not?
- Would you prefer some new features for the 1.5 series without having to redo customizations (even if it means the features take longer and the code isn't as organized)?
- If you would like to see further development of G1, would you be willing to help out? This could be coding, translating, make skins, giving suggestions, etc.
We are relying on your feedback to decide the future of Gallery 1! If interest is low, then we will likely continue to fix any major bugs that crop up and release bug-fix releases appropriately, but will cease other work on Gallery 1. So please, let us know how you feel!
I can't speak for the G1 users, but as a pleased G2 user, I would love to see the brain power that goes into supporting/updating the older G1 be freed up to go into G2. Especially if it got us some G2 Boolean search action... ;)
I have to agree - time to move all to G2. If people really need a databaseless photo tool, then maybe something using Sleepycat can be added as a database to G2 if it is not already. I would expect that the DB routines in G2 are abstracted enough that a mysql support plugin can be turned off and BerkeleyDB can be turned on. Or maybe that is something else to work on.
Let's hear what G1 users have to say. It's obvious that most G2 users would vote to abandon G1 completely. But - and I say this as G2 fan - G2 users aren't asked here.
Note that most of our resources go already into G2. It's a pretty small amount of the project's effort that still goes into G1. Thus, arguing to let go G1 for G2's sake doesn't make a lot of sense. G1 is developed and maintained just by G1 fans that have more fun or more experience working on G1 than on G2.
While most new Gallery users are picking G2 and not G1, there are still tons of happy G1 users with smoothly running G1 installations out there. I'm curious what they have to say.
We have moved to G2 for all of our sites. I will say that some I had to change servers due to how much slower G2 is, and that might affect many more people who would prefer G1 have a future. However, I would rather see more dynamic features in G2 such as the new dynamic views. We would love to load an album ones and display it in several places (view artists alphabetically as well as by category). These sorts of functions I don't think could be added to G1 but should be possible in G2. Rather than adding new features I would suggest security updates be the primary concern of G1's future.
As a long-time user of G1, I definitely support the release of Gallery 1.6, with its new features. Though I have modified previous versions of G1 before, the types of changes I make are usually cosmetic, and I would much rather have to go in and make the changes again (or do without) than not have the added functionality and cleaner code of an upgrade.
As far as me needing to upgrade to G2, my server cannot handle a database and web server, so G1 is for me!
Well I use G1 as a module for Postnuke, and love that it's easy to do. From my understanding G2 is not that friendly and you have to use a "customized" version from another source (I could be wrong here) thus really keeps me inclined to not make the move.
Now if G2 were as easy to install as a module into Postnuke as G1 is.. I'd move over in a heartbeat.
So if it is.. let me know... That's my arguement for G1's existence.
-izzy
As a user of both, and a contributing developer of both, I put in my +1 vote for a 1.6 release for the embedded community, as G1 is much easier to integrate into a 3rd party CMS, portal, etc (yes, blasphemy coming from the PHPNuke/phpBB2 integration dev).
[img]http://www.nukedgallery.net/signature.jpg[/img]
@dmolavi:
As a sidenote, please post some feedback about G1 vs G2 integration issues to -devel. Let's discuss how we can make it easier to integrate G2.
--------------
Documentation: Support / Troubleshooting | Installation, Upgrade, Configuration and Usage
As a long time G1 user I have to say that I appreciate every second the development team makes on this platform. I am already running the latest 1.6 RC on a large gallery and have found it to be great. I too customize the LAF a little to suit my needs, but like prior users my hardware cannot support G2 (tried, didn't do it) and I do not need any of the extra features over those offered by G1. Migrating to 1.6 gave me the opportunity to re-think all of my custom mods from the 1.5 line and implement them better than before.
The only 1.5 feature I miss in 1.6 is the fully-listed album tree. Although it makes my front page larger, it is much easier to get to specific galleries, particularly because it supports searching well. The new album tree is more compact but must be manually navigated to locate a gallery. While this tree also has a performance impact I cache the front page so it only gets regenerated daily which is an acceptable compromise for me.
Thanks to the G1 devs for all your great work!
I have been using G1 for a few years now and would put my vote alongside others encouraging a 1.6 release. I'm happy with the appearance and performance of G1, so haven't felt a need to go to G2 yet. (If it's not broken, don't fix it, right?)
My Gallery has few customizations and I've become comfortable creating patches for each release and applying them to my own tree. It's been a good exercise for someone still learning.
Thanks for such a great product.
I have been using G1 for my family gallery for about 5 years now, I am also using G2 on some other gallery projects so I have experience with both. That being said I still prefer G1 over G2. In fact the only reason I use G2 for those other sites is because the sheer number of photo's brings G1 to it's knee's, once you get over 20,000 pics G2 is basically a necessity.
If I could get a theme that makes G2 look like G1 I might migrate, but I have yet to see this fully achieved yet. And by fully achieved I mean looking at a G2 themed site and assuming that it is G1 because it's so similar. G1 is simple, smooth, clean, and just feels right. Plus it works!
The features in 1.6 do not appeal to me, they will not do anything for my site that I want or need. In fact if the CSS and style changes actual change the look and feel of the site I probably will not go down that path. Which will then probably force me into a G2 migration. I guess things can't stay the same forever, sooner or later G1 will show it's age in this snazzy web 2.0 world.. but for now it's still great. I encourage further development of G1, although the features in 1.6 don't really appeal to me that doesn't mean that something more down the line will not.
Thanks!
Hello chronos,
what feature would *you* like to see in G1?
Jens
--
Last Gallery v1 Developer and v1 translation manager.
Please do release 1.6. I'm running a few postnuke sites with gallery 1.5 embedded and would love to be able to use the group permissions.
Not being chronos, but let me leave my 3 cents?
What I need:
- Ability to choose the order of albums on the 1-st page of the gallery(not only "sort by ..."), like action Reorder in a simple album.
)
- Ability to switch off the animation for sub-albums tree (in my case it breakes the font of g-subalbumTree-box).
- Ability to show the 1-st page with sub-albums tree unfolded (like in the 1.5.x).
- My favourite blue skin!
- Quotas for users/groups (1-st step is done: Statistics).
My contribution will be: testing, Russian translation.
rtholmes:
So you would like to have the static "all nodes open" tree without any javascript in 1.6?
Or just an option how to open the tree? e.g. "all nodes open / closed"
Jens
--
Last Gallery v1 Developer and v1 translation manager.
I would prefer a javascript-free "all nodes open" look, just like existed in 1.5 (the full static tree listing the albums, showing nesting, and giving click counts). I acknowledge that others may prefer the javascript option though, so if possible a preference choosing the style may be best. I just find the fully-expanded list to be more usable as it is easier to search / get an overview of the album structure this way.
I use both Gallerys on different sites, and the reason I don't upgrade the Gallery 1.5 to a 2.0 is that I DON'T want to have to customize all over again. The site is fine the way it is, it doesn't need any more features.
For all new projects I use G2, databases are all over the place.
My suggestion would be: All effort into G2! Keep G1 safe, but new features and re-writes aren't necessary.
Thx and keep up all the great work: Gallery is one of the best OS-projects around!
I would agree with imforumman; security patches/updates for Gallery 1, and all remaining effort into Gallery 2.
The last I looked, there were some functionality gaps moving from 1 to 2. If there were full feature parity, I don't think this would be an issue.
I still have under 4000 photos in my albums, so G2 is overkill for me. However, if the upgrade were painless and transparent, and I didn't lose any functionality, I probably wouldn't care. When the developers think they are there and all existing 1 users can safely convert to 2, just announce it and I'll be first in line.
I agree with rtholmes. My site is similar in design and I prefer having the 1.5-style album tree as it gives new users an easy way to find what they're looking for (and since my computer isn't that fast, they spend less time browsing around which is sometimes painfully slow!).
Probably the best way is to choose the gallery layout (full tree or java script, sub-albums thumbs, and top albums order -- sorted, fixed, etc)
in the 1-st page administer_setup.php, not as the part of config.php.
About new features: IMHO, it's time to open a feature list voting procedure like that of G2 community. The focus groups of G1 and G2 are different, so we should continue to support G1 as long as we can. It is not a competition, it's just an evolution! With cross-fertilizing, I hope
)
I am sorry that i started a conversation here. That was not meant.
Lets continue the discussion in the existing thread for 1.6 suggestions. Or lets open a new one.
This thread was meant to give answers to the question in the initial post.
Jens
--
Last Gallery v1 Developer and v1 translation manager.
Personally, I think that Gallery 1 development should have ended when 2 was released. The focus of development should now be on G2 only.
Actually, I do think so, even given my comments above. You've already put work into the 1.6 branch and that work should be finished and released. Obviously there are still many G1 users and I'm sure they'd love to see that get released. However, 1.6 should be the last G1 release. It's time to spend your energy on G2.
If I were still using the G1 branch I'd personally want to see 1.6 released with well organized code rather than trying to bolt the new code onto 1.5.
I must admit, I hadn't given feedback on the RCs and I apologize. I'm running 1.6 now and beyond the front-page folder tree everything is working very well for me. For me the biggest changes are the CSS work and they have been great!
I have been running G1 for a number of years and am tired of hearing G2 users telling me to switch. I do not consider G1 and G2 to be the same product. G1 does things that G2 does not, and it does them well. G2 does things that G1 does not and these are things I do not need anyways. I will use G1 as long as it is maintained; once that day passes I will switch to something different altogether.
If developers are still willing to spend their own time working G1 I don't think anyone should deride them or imply they're wasting their time not working on G2. I think there are a lot of G1 users out there who greatly appreciate your efforts.
Even if G1 goes into security-fixing / bug-fixing mode only after 1.6 that would be fine with me. G1 currently does all I want (although 1.6 does it better w/ css).
I absolutely believe 1.6 should be released. Lots of work has gone into this release and I am already running a RC that I am extremely happy with. I think the CSS changes are the greatest reason to release 1.6 as I believe it is easier to make changes to 1.6 than 1.5.x.
I'm okay with redoing my customizations from 1.5.x. While this will require a little work it gives me the chance to improve my old mods and make new changes I had been putting off. The jump from 1.5.x to 1.6 is nowhere near the change from 1.5.x to 2.x.
I'm hoping to contribute some of my mods after 1.6 is released, I will try to be more active in giving feedback and suggestions in the future. Jens, thanks for all the great work you've done for G1. I appreciate it tremendously!
I think the most useful thing would be an optional MySQL back-end to help with overall performance of G1 (especially in larger implementations). It's important to leave the current non-database structure in place because that is the reason a lot of people use G1, but for those people who have MySQL or PostgreSQL drop the photo file indexes in there, as well as maybe comments/EXIF Info.. this may open the options for other more useful features down the line as well.
Other than that my feelings mirror a lot of the other posters comments, keep G1 safe and don't had unnecessary fluff, it's already very mature and I'm very happy with it!
A long time gallery 1 user and I would love to see continued development. G2 has it's place - but like above folks mention, if you don't need all of that and are happy with G1, then G1 is all you need. It's a great product - especially for all of the old hardware out there that it runs on *very* well.
Maybe a shopping cart? Basically - improved overall performance tweaks would be my only suggestion. G1 is a great product.
I think 1.6 should cease development and focus on 2.x.
Only security or bug fixes should be undertaken for 1.6, just enough to keep it working correctly and secure.
I vote to release 1.6, and then put it in maintenance mode.
My user for some reason like the look and feel of Gallery v 1.5.x so rolling out 1.6 would be beneficial. One site has over 2300 pictures and another site has over 3200 pictures. I 'm not sure if the speed will be there on Gallery v2.2.x.
I love the look and feel of G2, it's great for a stand alone Gallery. However, all of my production sites run Postnuke (Openstar, actually). The few times I've taken a shot at integrating G2 into a Postnuke site have all ended up the same way -- rip it out, put in G1 because it works so much better inside the existing framework. If there was native pnAPI support in G2, and then I'd switch over in a heartbeat. In the meantime, I can't part with G1.
I for one have been using G1 for ages, probably since it was released... I've modded and modded, patched and patched.
I've got G1 working the way I like it, and my family likes it. I ported to G2 a year or so back for testing, and did not get any warm fuzzies from family and friends, so I went back to G1.
I suppose since I've modded the cr@p out of my 1.5.x series, that I've chosen not to invest the time in porting all of my mods to 1.6.
I don't see any new features that have warranted my switch to either (1.6 or 2).
So, my vote, unfortunately, as with most G2 users now, I say, maintenance mode after a 1.6 release (those who have borne the RC's deserve a release)
Keep the 1.x.x series safe, and I'll be happy!
I love G1, and probably won't switch. I have over 10000 pictures, and it works! (well! I might add)
I agree that G2 is simply a different product.
Just another Postnuke User !
I really need Gallery1 and I vote for the new features of 1.6. My Gallery is above 8000 pics (increasing strong)and I have no problems. For Postnuke it is the best and easiest solution and I hope that Gallery 1.X has a long future with many new features.
I agree too that G2 is a different product. Keep the G1 alive, you do a really great job.
I have been a happy user of G1 for a few years and my vote goes to keeping G1 alive.
My sites are only small and basically all features that I need are already there in G1. Perhaps one thing that I may need in the future is integration with various CMSes. I know that it's reasonably easy to setup G1 with geeklog, postnuke and perhaps mambo, but what I am thinking about is basically an architectural change which provides hooks to integrate G1 with other CMSes.
And the best thing is that G1 runs well on my about 10 years old PC, no hardware upgarades necessary. G1 is a great product, it would be a pity to see it discontinued. Thank you!
I've been a user of Gallery 1 for the last five or so years, I also use Gallery 2 on another site I run.
In my opinion, G1 just works and works well, in other words, it does exactly what it says on the tin. G2 on the other hand is bloated with features, runs slowly and not at all well.
The tree view in G1 is great, slideshows work without having to reset the pricture size so I don't get a thumbnail up first, uploads using GR work and the picture is available immediatelly. The Microthumbs are great, and better than the G2 implementation.
On my small G2 install, it was a headache to even view the pictures as the thumbnails weren't built automatically.
When G2 has the ability to match the simplicity and the useability of G1, I'll convert (speed aside).
So please continue with 1.6 development, it is really appreciated!
I use both G1 and G2 (In fact, I support the G2 embedding plugin for the e107 CMS). I still use G1 for my personal portfolio site because of the ability to put it into offline mode to use httrack to download the site and burn it to a CD. G2 does not, as yet, have this ability. Until it does, I'll be stuck with G1.
For me, further development on G1 isn't essential as the current version does what I need it to do... but the more I use the new features in G2 (more photo toolkits options, more supported file types, panorama viewer etc...), the more I wish my G1 install could do what my G2 installs do, as well as let me do an offline copy.
I'm using Gallery 1.x since many years and the option that I'm waiting for is really the ability to create groups and entitle groups to different albums.
I tried Gallery 2.x but it's not as user friendly and simple than Gallery 1.x in my opinion. Maybe just because I'm pretty used to G1 and it's interface. It's easy to get lost in G2..
Thanks and continue the good work!
I think the most important thing for anyone (everyone?) to know is that *if* the G1 developer (yeah, there is only one) stops working on G1... he will almost certainly *not* be going to the G2 development team. So stopping G1 to free up resources to work on G2 is a non-starter. Dropping G1 development won't result in *anything* helpful to G2.
In fact, it could cause more trouble (imho) for G2 because now a bunch of old G1 users who are *happy* with it will eventually need to move to G2 and potentially be *unhappy* with that.
Even though I don't use G1 anymore, I feel that releasing G1.6 and then going into bug/security fix mode would be the best solution. Anyone who wants to stick with 1.5.x line still can, if they have reasons to... and anyone who wants the new, end of life greatness of 1.6 can go there as well.
_________________________________
Support & Documentation || Donate to Gallery || My Website
As a G1 user, I welcome upgrades and further developement to G1. I am happy with G1 and its features. I read, with dismay about G2 users calling for the stop in developement.
I tried G2 before and isn't too happy with it. It is not easy to upload to my server (with so many modules) and not as easy to customise as G1.
I do not need a database to manage my photos as I do not activate commenting and voting system. Descriptions are kept to a minimum. Hence, meta files are sufficient to keep my G1 working as the basic functionality of my G installation is to display photos.
The only features I hope to see is:
1. the improvement in templating and layout system. Allow us to easily customise the layout of the thumbnails and photos. Employ more CSS rather than to rely on tables for layout. Completely seperate code from design so that I do not have to modify so many file to integrate the site design to all of the G1 pages.
2. Improve the layout and navigation of the admin. It breaks in IE7.
I'm staying with Gallery 1 because of the need to run a separate database server. I'd love to see some effort put into making the Gallery 2 work with SQLite -- enough database power for 99.9% of gallery users, without the administrative overhead.
I just noticed someone using a Gallery 1 implementation and was impressed with the speed with which the pages loaded. I have elected to use dare I say it coppermine due to the speedy page loading which I believe is the single most important technical factor for the success of a gallery. I much prefer the community feel here at gallery to that at coppermine and would suggest that the way forward is to somehow speed up gallery 2 by getting back to basics. It may be that the gallery 1 is a better code and gallery 2 should be halted and redeveloped based on the gallery 1. I much appreciate all the work you are doing in providing these open source software and hope I will be able to use them to provide the community photos that inspire. Thank you.
(edit. Having said that fryfrog's gallery seems to load quite fast so maybe I need to reevaluate the gallery 2 before I proceed. Hmm. It still seems to be slower than coppermine.)
That's crazy! Everyone I show my gallery to invariably says "Damn, you photo gallery is slow!" and I say "Yes, yes, I know... it is hosted on my home's cable modem. Sorry."
Though locally, it is pretty fast. G2 *can* be fast, but a lot of the time G1 is faster. It all depends on the specific situation.
_________________________________
Support & Documentation || Donate to Gallery || My Website
hi Jens,
as one of the few actually testing some of the G1.6 features and reporting on it, I'd like to explicitly answer your questions, even though you already have my opinion on several issues of 1.6.
but first: thanks a lot for your unrelenting effort to keep the G1 development going. as many said before I also appreciate the 'simplicity' of G1. I installed several versions of G2 and played around with it, but never came to the point to actually switch.
as a long time user I'd love to see it evolve somewhat further. no big steps, no big modifications, keeping the simple and clear look&feel. keep development smooth and slowly as it is a well functioning and mature platform.
as discussed several times I rate the group feature for user management highest. this would actually be my only reason to migrate to 1.6 (having to add all my mods to the new code).
if group management means G1.6, then yes, I'd really like to have that.
this is very tempting...
yes, I would like to have group management in 1.5.7 ;-) and possibly captcha support in 1.5.8 and ...
yes, I'd be willing to run tests and give some suggestions/opinions, as I already did to some extend.
thanks & keep up the good work, it's appreciated!
cheers,
-- Peter
[img]http://www.schumacher.ch/logob.jpg[/img]
I've been a long time user of Gallery, both G1 and G2
I started out with G1 and LOVE/LOVED it and its uses. I'm a bit mixed feeling on the subject of stopping development on G1 and going with G2 since there are things that G1 has that G2 doesn't (This has been stated quite a few times in this thread).
I believe the functionality that G1 has should be ported to G2 as a must so that if any user wants to use or upgrade to G2 can without worry of loss of functionality.
G1 is great for small photo gallery's. As a poster already commented, once you get above a certain number, you can definitely tell its limitations.
Maybe have some development people start porting G1 functions over to G2 so that if in the future of gallery is G2, then it will have all features ever created for the gallery project with the last 1.* version being 1.6
After that long post my vote is:
Release 1.6
port G1 features to G2 that G2 doesn't have. (IE: Users being able to customize color backgrounds,links,etc.. on their own without a "theme")
http://www.trueppc.com
http://www.trueppc.com/gallery
I run both G1 and G2 on different sites.
G1 is fast and integrates well with Joomla
G2 is slow and clunky and more difficult to integrate. I know the slowness is probably due to the dbase server but as it is a fully hosted site (1and1) I cannot influence the database performance.
*cough* sqlite *cough*
This discussion is about G1 / G1.6. Please continue any G2 / G2 performance discussions in the forum. Also note that G2 isn't slow on all hosts and that there are many reasons why G2 can be slow.
Valiant -- point taken, but the relevance is that concerns over G2 performance is a major reason people are still interested in G1.
Sure, we know that very well and G2 will continue to mature and get faster over time.
Just note that database-driven web-applications aren't slow per se. There are many reasons and some of them are mentioned on G2's roadmap page.
</offtopic>
Now let's please continue the discussion about G1 / G1.6.
Jens, I very much appreciate the work you have done on G1. I have many friends and family members setup with G1 sites. I myself have tried G2 but am back using G1. G1 just seems more userfriendly to me. I certainly hope it is decided to release 1.6 even though I don't necessarily need some of the new features... I just want to see G1 continue
You asked somebody what features they would like to see? Well... I have ONE feature I would LOVE to see implemented. This feature has to do with uploading pictures. There are currently a few different ways to upload pics... using the Form and using the Applet. I would really love to see an option/additional tab that would allow just ONE picture to be uploaded at a time with the difference being that the person uploading could input specific information as would be defined by the "extra fields" for that album. For example, on a car site which shows pictures of exterior modifications like wheels, hoods, body kits, etc. one might have the extra fields of "Modification", "Place purchased", and "Username". Then, using this new picture uploading option, a user could upload a picture either from the hard drive or a URL location AND at the same time input the extra fields information. This would be an excellent feature IMO
Again, thanks much for your hard work on G1!
Hi,
could you put that into http://gallery.menalto.com/node/63475 ?
So i have a central point to look at. Kinda "todo list"
Thanks for the nice words,
Jens
--
Last Gallery v1 Developer and v1 translation manager.
I prefer G1 mode: no DB server needs, easy to manage, move.
I manage 40Kphoto ona p3 800 with 256 Mb of ram and all run fine.
Toody I will try to upgrade my 1.5.x to 1.6