Discuss: phpBB 3.2.1 released

[Ger]

I think a separate pack for newbies without the images, store, files folders and config.php file would be a lot helpful so they dont get messed-up if incase a backup doesn't exist.

There are enough problems with people not using the most appropriate package already without introducing any more.

I see your point, but adding an extra package with the correct (and only those) files, without the need to figure out what to delete from that package might be simpler for the average Joe.

[KevC]

It might make sense to have that as a replacement for the Changed Files version. The download for that is enormous with the changed files for every single step version. A package with the same name with just the current files that you can safely change without affecting a non-edited board would make sense to me.

[Helios7]

I think a separate pack for newbies without the images, store, files folders and config.php file would be a lot helpful so they dont get messed-up if incase a backup doesn't exist.

There are enough problems with people not using the most appropriate package already without introducing any more.

Yes. I think we can have an additional tab "Manual Update" next to "Automatic Update".

This "Manual Update" can have a zip file without "config.php file, folders like /images, /store and /files". It can easily guide newbies to perform the update a bit easier.

User when not finding "Automatic Update" will easily move to the "Manual Update".

[DavidIQ]

Yes. I think we can have an additional tab "Manual Update" next to "Automatic Update".

This "Manual Update" can have a zip file without "config.php file, folders like /images, /store and /files". It can easily guide newbies to perform the update a bit easier.

User when not finding "Automatic Update" will easily move to the "Manual Update".

We already have that. It's called the Changed Files package.

Mind you the missing automatic update packages might be back at some point so this conversation might be moot. Plus I'm thinking that we could modify the changed files tab to only download the applicable package like one can do on the auto update package page. This would shrink down considerably the zip file that gets downloaded.

[2600]

Why is it so hard not to follow this: https://www.phpbb.com/support/docs/en/3 ... ating-32x/

I did exactly this and had no trouble at all upgrading. Outside of my core file edits I had to revert back, but that's it. I just keep a folder and a list of all the edits I do to my core files. If you never mess with core files, updating couldn't be easier.

I feel bad for the one's that don't make a back up prior to upgrading and then find a problem and can't revert back. Ah, well, maybe not.

[privatefalcon]

I've just done a changed files upgrade from 3.2.0 to 3.2.1 on my test server using files from the "phpBB-3.2.1-files.zip" (and the phpBB-3.2.0_to_3.2.1.zip included within that).

I performed the update from the command line and I noticed that phpbbcli.php contains:

define('PHPBB_VERSION', '3.2.1-RC1');

Shouldn't that be:

define('PHPBB_VERSION', '3.2.1');

The upgrade finished successfully and the version is reported as 3.2.1 in the admin area so presumably it doesn't matter...

[brinch]

Going to the Automatic Update tab, I see this:

Update packages are not currently available.

Do you know when this will be available?

[KevC]

Going to the Automatic Update tab, I see this:

Update packages are not currently available.

Do you know when this will be available?

There's a bug in it so it's been taken down.
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2432606
You shouldn't need it as hard coded edits are not used so much these days.

[mamba]

You shouldn't need it as hard coded edits are not used so much these days.

So you are saying I don't need the automatic updates and I can simply overwrite all the changed files I have on my server? You have got to be kidding! I have bespoke edits to
overall_footer.html
overall_header.html
colours.css
functions_messenger.php
ucp.php
ucp_register.php

So just overwrite hours of work? Nice.

[DavidIQ]

So just overwrite hours of work? Nice.

His comment was clearly aimed at persons that have not been editing core files, which is not really needed if you use the many available events. That you've done hours worth of edits to some of the files you've listed is just a recipe for disaster any way you look at it.

In any case the auto updater will eventually be back, but will take a while and likely not until 3.2.2.

[mamba]

That you've done hours worth of edits to some of the files you've listed is just a recipe for disaster any way you look at it.

Oh please. My site has run very successfully and profitably for over a decade. Some "disaster". And never once have I seen any advice here not to make edits to these files; indeed, the automatic update process specifically supports them.

[DavidIQ]

Yep, but here we are with you complaining you're unable to update due to making likely totally avoidable edits to core files. Also we've been saying to avoid editing them as much as possible for a few years now.

[mamba]

Yep, but here we are with you complaining you're unable to update due to making likely totally avoidable edits to core files. Also we've been saying to avoid editing them as much as possible for a few years now.

Why have I never seen any official announcement that advises specifically not to make changes to core files? If there is one, it was not made clear to sporadic visitors to this site, like me.

Regarding "totally avoidable edits", that's nonsense. All of my edits are key to the functioning of my site, such as:

• automated slider in header that tells visitors key information
• Tailored registration process with key statements and graphics

Now let's be clear, I could use file comparison software to manually re-insert the edits into the latest version, but I think it's a pretty poor show that you have released a version with a broken auto-update, especially when a lot of updaters like me rely on it!

[3Di]

@mamba, I see you are a MODifications lover so to speak.
Back to those times where no extensions were available, you could do something old fashioned that way.
As you said while I was typing and I was bound to suggest you too, using a file comp'arison software like WinMerge will do, ATM. At the end of all, the auto-update package isn't available for some good reasons, last bet is to wait till comes back.

[DavidIQ]

Regarding "totally avoidable edits", that's nonsense. All of my edits are key to the functioning of my site, such as:

• automated slider in header that tells visitors key information
• Tailored registration process with key statements and graphics

Now let's be clear, I could use file comparison software to manually re-insert the edits into the latest version, but I think it's a pretty poor show that you have released a version with a broken auto-update, especially when a lot of updaters like me rely on it!

And I find it a poor show that you've manually edited files for these changes when no edits are needed. Also suggesting an announcement was needed to state that edits are discouraged is a bit excessive and, frankly, a bit obvious through the introduction of extensions and events for which announcements and discussions were made.

Since your goal seems to be to just find someone to blame, as there really isn't anything that will come out of this, I'll end this pointless back and forth by saying that yes the auto updater is broken, this was not discovered until after countless support topics were created about it failing, and the quickest fix, without making yet another release since that's what it would take, was to take the packages offline. They will probably be back for the next release which will be some time from now.