ispCP Omega 1.0.5 Stable Release

[bodsink]

I've upgraded just 15 minutes on debian lenny 64 bits great

[marchaos]

Hi, what is about this http://www.isp-control.net/ispcp/changeset/2779 and http://www.isp-control.net/ispcp/changeset/2783 ? Is adding hosting plan in 1.0.5 works without this patches? Why 1.0.5 have this errors if it stable? Now we need to wait next stable? o_O May be you can create page at site where you add the patches (security and other bugfixes) for the stable versions + cumulative patch if you can. Some people use other update strategy. They updates stable version which allready relised all time before next stable version will exist. They changed only date at site when stable version was relised. But nice to have some automative update system inside ispCP. We need to think about Software Installer, often updates makes using of this impossible. Thanks.
P.S.: Now it looks like trunk is most stable version. It's joke but looks like true. How you think?
Anyway you makes good job. I like it.

[kilburn]

Quote:Why 1.0.5 have this errors if it stable?

On the one hand, every piece of software out there has errors (usually called bugs), and we are no exception. Nevertheless, during the last week of our release process we contact all our supporters (such as you) to test the would-be-stable release in order to find and iron-out any bugs that may have slipped through normal dev testing. In this specific case, it turns out that none of the testers tried the "hosting plans at admin level" feature (because they probably don't use it), and so this error was undetected.

On the other hand, our experience about rushing out new versions to fix bugs has not been good at all. We will do it if any critical (security) bug is found, but we will not in any other case. Additionally, trunk just looks like the most stable version because nobody is really using it for production, and thus it's bugs doesn't generate a lot of whine. In any case, trunk has surely been worse than stable prior to the release date, because all the bugs were there before release, as well as all the other ones that have been solved during the final stages of the release process.

That said, nobody stops you from getting some files directly from trunk and using them in your stable installation, such as the ones fixed by your linked changesets.

[marchaos]

It seems 1.0.5 does not have TOS. This changeset http://www.isp-control.net/ispcp/changeset/2614 exist in trunk (1.0.6) but not in 1.0.5 http://www.isp-control.net/ispcp/browser...an_add.php .Please check this. Is this true?

[foxb]

Just updated 1.0.4 to 1.0.5 on CentOS 5.4.

There is a mistake in update instructions
http://www.isp-control.net/documentation...ade:centos

make install


should be

make -f Makefile.centos install

First I used make install and it broke httpd config.

Can someone confirm that?

If it is confirmed someone can change the wiki.

[RatS]

(04-04-2010 07:55 AM)marchaos Wrote:  It seems 1.0.5 does not have TOS.

That's true, I just discovered yesterday, that we forgot to merge ToS into the release branch. Will be in 1.0.5 1.0.6.

(04-04-2010 08:07 AM)foxb Wrote:  Just updated 1.0.4 to 1.0.5 on CentOS 5.4.

[…]
should be

make -f Makefile.centos install

This is true, too. I fixed it in the Documentation. Sorry for this, I hope your installation still works.

[marchaos]

(04-04-2010 09:30 AM)RatS Wrote:  That's true, I just discovered yesterday, that we forgot to merge ToS into the release branch. Will be in 1.0.5.

May be in 1.0.6? I'm just updated server today and can wait. Looks fine. 2 themes in PMA have the same name "ispCP", better to rename one of them in 1.0.6.

[foxb]

(04-04-2010 09:30 AM)RatS Wrote:  ....

(04-04-2010 08:07 AM)foxb Wrote:  Just updated 1.0.4 to 1.0.5 on CentOS 5.4.

[…]
should be

make -f Makefile.centos install

This is true, too. I fixed it in the Documentation. Sorry for this, I hope your installation still works.

I did not test that case...

Simply restored the whole system from backup and upgraded again.

[gOOvER]

(04-01-2010 01:47 PM)atomgrill Wrote:  I like the new PMA theme. Although I miss the miss indent on the grouping databases with similar names, like test, test_3, test_etc. Too late for me to explain so I've attached a pic showing the difference from current theme vs original

I splitt the Thread and open an new Thread for this Problem/Enhancement

=> http://www.isp-control.net/forum/thread-10257.html

[momo]

Great work!
Update went smoothly.