Advanced search  

News:

cpg1.5.48 Security release - upgrade mandatory!
The Coppermine development team is releasing a security update for Coppermine in order to counter a recently discovered vulnerability. It is important that all users who run version cpg1.5.46 or older update to this latest version as soon as possible.
[more]

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: [Turned Down]: anycontent.php vs. DB-Entry  (Read 4017 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

taucher_0815

  • Coppermine frequent poster
  • ***
  • Country: 00
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
[Turned Down]: anycontent.php vs. DB-Entry
« on: June 04, 2010, 09:48:18 am »

Hi Team!

What about going away from the "static" content of the anycontent.php file and moving this data into one of the DB-Tables?

Reason: During Updates / Upgrades often the anycontent-file is overwritten and all the stuff has to be recovered from a backup or the file has to be filled again.

With the DB-Solution the users don't have to care about the files changes by themself except of the Themes.

Regards
Sven
« Last Edit: June 04, 2010, 11:08:21 am by Joachim Müller »
Logged

Joachim Müller

  • Dev Team member
  • Coppermine addict
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 47844
  • aka "GauGau"
    • gaugau.de
Re: anycontent.php vs. DB-Entry
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2010, 11:08:11 am »

Not a valid feature request imo, or at least on that needs to be turned down: the upgrade instructions explain the need to backup and they explain as well not to overwrite anycontent. We have little sympathy for those who ignore the docs, don't take backups before upgrading and then rant about their custom files getting overwritten.
If you're not happy with the way anycontent works, there's a load of other mechanisms you can use to add you custom content, i.e. to accomplish the very same thing you can accomplish using anycontent:
  • using the custom header feature
  • hard-coding into your custom theme
  • implementing a plugin that injects content

Anycontent has been added specifically for those who are more familiar with editing a file. For all who prefer other methods, those methods exist as well. Marking request as "turned down".
« Last Edit: June 04, 2010, 11:27:50 am by Joachim Müller »
Logged

taucher_0815

  • Coppermine frequent poster
  • ***
  • Country: 00
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: [Turned Down]: anycontent.php vs. DB-Entry
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2010, 11:19:18 am »

OK.

I am one of those, who READ the docs as I am working in the IT also ;)

Was just thinking of the kind of users who klick on "replace everything" on the FTP-Client :)
Logged

Joachim Müller

  • Dev Team member
  • Coppermine addict
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 47844
  • aka "GauGau"
    • gaugau.de
Re: [Turned Down]: anycontent.php vs. DB-Entry
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2010, 11:33:01 am »

I understood that perfectly well. Your request is valid in itself: you're posting suggestions for areas where you can see issues. I'm not very fond of anycontent neither, but I respect the dev who introduced it in the first place and I can see that there are users who use it, who are familiar with it and subsequently would complian if the feature was dropped. As I said, I have little sympathy for those who blindly perform the update without reading.
So please don't take this as a personal attack. I'm turning your request down with all the years of experience as a coppermine project manager in the background, so please don't let this discourage you: keep on requesting new feature, keep on contributing.
Logged

taucher_0815

  • Coppermine frequent poster
  • ***
  • Country: 00
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: [Turned Down]: anycontent.php vs. DB-Entry
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2010, 11:37:03 am »

Joachim,
i didn't took this as a personal attack...

And for sure i will add mor "requests" as something comes in my mind :)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 20 queries.