I’ve been gone for quite some time, but I’m back! (sorry guys) I find myself out of the loop on ScriptWorx.
Some poking around here has turned me on to some nice advancements over the past year, but I still don’t see ScriptWorx-installed software as being updatable. Ideally, when installing someting via ScriptWorx, the user would have the option to let the software be updated automatically by ScriptWorx, or be notified perhaps…
I may be beating a a bottle of glue here, but I know its possible. I’ll give you the fact that the majority of popular web software out there doesn’t lend itself to slick updating and you guys really shouldn’t go around futzing with release after release of software to make something like this a reality, but still, I find myself greedy.
Would a system-stock install be such a bad thing? (User gets a read only copy of some software, and can’t touch a thing, makeing it safe(er) for SWorx to update it.)
How about a complex install system with intelegent file merges?
How bad would it be to patch some of this software into a (increasingly common?) config + override setup?
If any of this has been covered recently feel free to slap me.
I think the only viable option would be to notify the user when an upgrade is available. However, the option to overwrite the current installation’s files (after user confirmation) would be useful. Most good scripts come with an upgrader which would upgrade previous versions of the database for whatever script/application it is, if any changes are required by an upgrade.
I would hate to have a read-only install… Some scripts require write access anyway for file uploads etc.
File mergers might work, but would require a lot of extra work from the IWorx guys or the scripts devs.
True, but by breifly defining user-modifiable files, I’d bet a lot of upgrades would go smoothly. The bulk of any package wouldn’t be touched by users, so those files can be copied over simply (after quick check of file hashes to make sure eveything is OK). Confuration files would be left in tact. Modular components would be left alone (skins directories, etc…).
Now, there is always the case of user’s applying patches or touching out-of-bounds stuff, in which case SWorx should refuse to upgrade.
If I recall correctly, phpBB has one config file and directories for skins. An upgrade from one version to another could replace every distribution file (except for the configuration if a sample/defualt is provided) run any update scrips, and just plain work. People do apply 3rd party patches to phpBB, in which case any automated updater should refuse to continue.
I’m not saying this should be done for every package, but supporting the option would be great, since a lot of software can be upgraded smoothly in an automated manner.
If I recall correctly, phpBB has one config file and directories for skins. An upgrade from one version to another could replace every distribution file (except for the configuration if a sample/defualt is provided) run any update scrips, and just plain work. People do apply 3rd party patches to phpBB, in which case any automated updater should refuse to continue.
I’m not saying this should be done for every package, but supporting the option would be great, since a lot of software can be upgraded smoothly in an automated manner.[/quote]
We’ve discussed this some internally and is certainly a possibility at some point. Some scripts even provide only changed file downloads (phpbb) and with a lot of others we could replace all filex except the config file and themes (because a lot of people customize the themes), but the problem is that sometimes you need a totally new config file, or there are needed changes in themes to support new features, or whatnot; and doing this for some scripts and not others would be confusing and inconsistent. We’d probably need to solve this problem for the vast majority of the supported scripts before implementing it.
Would a system-stock install be such a bad thing? (User gets a read only copy of some software, and can’t touch a thing, makeing it safe(er) for SWorx to update it.)
Yes it would because part of the appeal of CMS and forums software is the ability to update and tweak it.
Also Iworx itself was designed to be updatable and configurable and doing something like this kind of flys inthe face of that.
How about a complex install system with intelegent file merges?
Are you volunteering your services? . . . j/k
If any of this has been covered recently feel free to slap me.
It’s been discussed a lot but no need to slap you for it.
ScriptWorx is by no means a “finished product” and I’m sure future versions will implement some way of updating at least some scripts (but this isn’t something to do halfway) if possible. There will also be a way to determine wether a particular server meets php/mysql/perl module system requirements which it doesn’t now.
Tough call… Do you say only half the cars on the lot can get new tires, or none of them… Anyway, with a few minor consessions it can be done. Drop me a line when testing
Prereqs has always been a pain. I’m sure you can guess how many times I’ve found support for something missing way too late.
I’m sure it’s possible too but there was already so mich in the new scriptworx this version, as I understand it the code was prety mich rewritten from the ground up. We’ll keel youe offer in mind.
Prereqs has always been a pain. I’m sure you can guess how many times I’ve found support for something missing way too late.
