[Map Module] Which version do you use ?

Termitenshort

Joined: 2005-10-09
Posts: 1894

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 13:22

I would like to know which version everyone uses if possible. I'm trying to figure out if I should continue dev. on the gallery 2.0 version of if it should be strickly limited to bug fixes and maybe only dev the newer version for gallery 2.1

I have to say it's hard to keep track of 2 version of the same module

-------------------------
The Termite

LFrank

Joined: 2005-02-19
Posts: 1023

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 13:29

I've switched already fully to 2.1
CU
Lutz

Gallery version = 2.1-rc-1b core 1.0.30
PHP version=5.1.2 apache2handler
Webserver=Apache/2.2.0 (Win32) DAV/2 PHP/5.1.1 mod_ssl/2.2.0 OpenSSL/0.9.8a
Database=mysql 5.0.18-nt-log
Gallery-URL=http://lf-photodesign.de

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 14:12

Gallery 2.0 For production sites and only upgrade to final releases (skipping RCs) after the first month. But saying that I am happy with the map module. So my vote is to dev on G2.1 and bug fix the module for G2.0.

Dave
____________________________________________________
Gallery Frames / Mods || G1 Test Gallery

Termitenshort

Joined: 2005-10-09
Posts: 1894

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 14:14

Oh and I forgot.

My production machine runs on 0.4.10c for now with gallery 2.0.2
The Map Module Team gallery runs the latest CVS with map module 0.5.0c

See you !
-------------------------
The Termite

patrickthickey

Joined: 2004-08-22
Posts: 164

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 14:31

0.5.0c for me.

regards,

patrick

Gallery version = 2.1-rc-1a core 1.0.28
PHP version = 4.3.9 apache2handler
Webserver = Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat)
Database = postgres7
Toolkits = Exif, ArchiveUpload, Dcraw, Ffmpeg, ImageMagick, NetPBM, Gd
Operating system = Linux 2.6.9-11.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri May 20 18:25:30 EDT 2005 x86_64
Browser = Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060111 Firefox/1.5.0.1
http://www.idyll.com/gallery2

galmoid

Joined: 2005-11-07
Posts: 364

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 15:01

My vote is for all development to be channeled into 0.5 and
0.4 to have -only- severe/critical problems addressed. That
will simplify things and allow for R&D of 0.5 on Gallery 2.1
and API-V2.

Termitenshort

Joined: 2005-10-09
Posts: 1894

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 16:13

Ok then .. that sets it unless someone doesn't agree later

That's what I was thinking since there was 80 d/l of map-module-0.5.0c.zip compared to only 20 for map-module-0.4.0c.zip (even tho the later is a lot less buggy).

So I will be concentrating my effort on dev for Gallery 2.1 from now on and will publish a new version of the map module v 0.5.0 soon to correct all(or as many as possible) bugs found to date.

See you all !
-------------------------
The Termite

ommma

Joined: 2005-10-03
Posts: 52

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 16:23

Yeah I also use 2.1 and I am really looking forward to the bug fixes

LFrank

Joined: 2005-02-19
Posts: 1023

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 16:28

yippiii
;)

Gallery version = 2.1-rc-1b core 1.0.30
PHP version=5.1.2 apache2handler
Webserver=Apache/2.2.0 (Win32) DAV/2 PHP/5.1.1 mod_ssl/2.2.0 OpenSSL/0.9.8a
Database=mysql 5.0.18-nt-log
Gallery-URL=http://lf-photodesign.de

dotnature

Joined: 2005-10-26
Posts: 224

Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 18:39

my vote is for 2.1 as well

Mozambique

Joined: 2005-11-29
Posts: 108

Posted: Wed, 2006-03-01 11:17

Quote:

So my vote is to dev on G2.1 and bug fix the module for G2.0.

Agree. Currently 2.0.2/0.4.10c

Moz

eduo

Joined: 2003-09-10
Posts: 107

Posted: Wed, 2006-03-01 15:50

Agreed. 2.0 should get bugs fixed and development could then move fully to 2.1.

With any luck any fix for 2.0 can be transferred to the 2.1 base anyway.

Eduo
---
www.eduo.info
www.eduo.info/gallery/
www.hamsterspit.com

Termitenshort

Joined: 2005-10-09
Posts: 1894

Posted: Wed, 2006-03-01 16:16

eduo wrote:

With any luck any fix for 2.0 can be transferred to the 2.1 base anyway.

Yes but that takes a lot of my time and it's basically doing the work twice (even if the second time is copy/paste)...

I'd like to focus on dev for 1 version to prevent mistakes also. Let me tell you that it's pretty confusing to manage 2 version of the same program

0.5.0 will now get all the focus after I'm done fixing the current bugs

See you !

Termitenshort Joined: 2005-10-09 Posts: 1894	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 13:22
	I would like to know which version everyone uses if possible. I'm trying to figure out if I should continue dev. on the gallery 2.0 version of if it should be strickly limited to bug fixes and maybe only dev the newer version for gallery 2.1 I have to say it's hard to keep track of 2 version of the same module ------------------------- The Termite
	XUser login Username: * Password: * Create new account Request new password
LFrank Joined: 2005-02-19 Posts: 1023	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 13:29
	I've switched already fully to 2.1 CU Lutz Gallery version = 2.1-rc-1b core 1.0.30 PHP version=5.1.2 apache2handler Webserver=Apache/2.2.0 (Win32) DAV/2 PHP/5.1.1 mod_ssl/2.2.0 OpenSSL/0.9.8a Database=mysql 5.0.18-nt-log Gallery-URL=http://lf-photodesign.de

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 14:12
	Gallery 2.0 For production sites and only upgrade to final releases (skipping RCs) after the first month. But saying that I am happy with the map module. So my vote is to dev on G2.1 and bug fix the module for G2.0. Dave ____________________________________________________ Gallery Frames / Mods \|\| G1 Test Gallery

Termitenshort Joined: 2005-10-09 Posts: 1894	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 14:14
	Oh and I forgot. My production machine runs on 0.4.10c for now with gallery 2.0.2 The Map Module Team gallery runs the latest CVS with map module 0.5.0c See you ! ------------------------- The Termite

patrickthickey Joined: 2004-08-22 Posts: 164	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 14:31
	0.5.0c for me. regards, patrick Gallery version = 2.1-rc-1a core 1.0.28 PHP version = 4.3.9 apache2handler Webserver = Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat) Database = postgres7 Toolkits = Exif, ArchiveUpload, Dcraw, Ffmpeg, ImageMagick, NetPBM, Gd Operating system = Linux 2.6.9-11.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri May 20 18:25:30 EDT 2005 x86_64 Browser = Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060111 Firefox/1.5.0.1 http://www.idyll.com/gallery2

galmoid Joined: 2005-11-07 Posts: 364	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 15:01
	My vote is for all development to be channeled into 0.5 and 0.4 to have -only- severe/critical problems addressed. That will simplify things and allow for R&D of 0.5 on Gallery 2.1 and API-V2.

Termitenshort Joined: 2005-10-09 Posts: 1894	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 16:13
	Ok then .. that sets it unless someone doesn't agree later That's what I was thinking since there was 80 d/l of map-module-0.5.0c.zip compared to only 20 for map-module-0.4.0c.zip (even tho the later is a lot less buggy). So I will be concentrating my effort on dev for Gallery 2.1 from now on and will publish a new version of the map module v 0.5.0 soon to correct all(or as many as possible) bugs found to date. See you all ! ------------------------- The Termite

ommma Joined: 2005-10-03 Posts: 52	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 16:23
	Yeah I also use 2.1 and I am really looking forward to the bug fixes

LFrank Joined: 2005-02-19 Posts: 1023	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 16:28
	yippiii ;) Gallery version = 2.1-rc-1b core 1.0.30 PHP version=5.1.2 apache2handler Webserver=Apache/2.2.0 (Win32) DAV/2 PHP/5.1.1 mod_ssl/2.2.0 OpenSSL/0.9.8a Database=mysql 5.0.18-nt-log Gallery-URL=http://lf-photodesign.de

dotnature Joined: 2005-10-26 Posts: 224	Posted: Tue, 2006-02-28 18:39
	my vote is for 2.1 as well

Mozambique Joined: 2005-11-29 Posts: 108	Posted: Wed, 2006-03-01 11:17
	Quote: So my vote is to dev on G2.1 and bug fix the module for G2.0. Agree. Currently 2.0.2/0.4.10c Moz

eduo Joined: 2003-09-10 Posts: 107	Posted: Wed, 2006-03-01 15:50
	Agreed. 2.0 should get bugs fixed and development could then move fully to 2.1. With any luck any fix for 2.0 can be transferred to the 2.1 base anyway. Eduo --- www.eduo.info www.eduo.info/gallery/ www.hamsterspit.com

Termitenshort Joined: 2005-10-09 Posts: 1894	Posted: Wed, 2006-03-01 16:16
	eduo wrote: With any luck any fix for 2.0 can be transferred to the 2.1 base anyway. Yes but that takes a lot of my time and it's basically doing the work twice (even if the second time is copy/paste)... I'd like to focus on dev for 1 version to prevent mistakes also. Let me tell you that it's pretty confusing to manage 2 version of the same program 0.5.0 will now get all the focus after I'm done fixing the current bugs See you !

[Map Module] Which version do you use ?

XUser login