You can subscribe to this list here.
2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(103) |
Apr
(37) |
May
(45) |
Jun
(49) |
Jul
(55) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(47) |
Oct
(55) |
Nov
(47) |
Dec
(8) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2003 |
Jan
(43) |
Feb
(85) |
Mar
(121) |
Apr
(37) |
May
(33) |
Jun
(33) |
Jul
(14) |
Aug
(34) |
Sep
(58) |
Oct
(68) |
Nov
(31) |
Dec
(9) |
2004 |
Jan
(13) |
Feb
(57) |
Mar
(37) |
Apr
(26) |
May
(57) |
Jun
(14) |
Jul
(8) |
Aug
(12) |
Sep
(32) |
Oct
(10) |
Nov
(7) |
Dec
(12) |
2005 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(50) |
Apr
(20) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(20) |
Jul
(83) |
Aug
(25) |
Sep
(17) |
Oct
(14) |
Nov
(32) |
Dec
(27) |
2006 |
Jan
(24) |
Feb
(15) |
Mar
(46) |
Apr
(5) |
May
(6) |
Jun
(9) |
Jul
(12) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(5) |
2007 |
Jan
(4) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(7) |
Apr
(3) |
May
(4) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
(22) |
Dec
(19) |
2008 |
Jan
(94) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(32) |
Apr
(46) |
May
(20) |
Jun
(10) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(20) |
Sep
(16) |
Oct
(12) |
Nov
(13) |
Dec
|
2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
(9) |
Mar
(37) |
Apr
(65) |
May
(15) |
Jun
|
Jul
(24) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(21) |
Dec
(5) |
2010 |
Jan
(35) |
Feb
(6) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
|
May
(4) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-04-12 13:41:20
|
Hi, either use sourceforge for this: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=8956 Or get it from my webpage: http://www.e-dynamics.be/programs/phpesp/phpESP-2.1.0.tgz Franky On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 09:26:07 -0400 Geof Collis <gc...@ne...> wrote: > Hi Frankie > > Got a quick link to the download page? > > cheers > > GeofA > > t 08:15 AM 4/12/2008, Franky Van Liedekerke wrote: > >Hi all, > > > >the latest and best of phpESP has been released: version 2.1.0. > >Many things have changed, but the most changing one is the split of > >the config file in 3 seperate files, allowing easier updates (see the > >CHANGELOG file). > > > > >From the changelog: > > > >- Dashboard implementation (by Bishop Bettini) > > > >- start/stop date for a survey (by Bishop Bettini) > > > >- A conditional question resulted in a "non-required" for the > >question it depends on, this limit has been removed. > > > >- You can now do authenticated ldap binds when searching for the uid, > >some LDAP servers need this (is more secure than anonymous binds > >anyway) > > > >- A default config file has been added > >(admin/phpESP.ini.php.default), your own changes should go into > >admin/phpESP.ini.php. The advantage is that new options can be added > >to the default file and you don't need to change anything to your > >own config file. Also a fixed part has been added > >(admin/phpESP.ini.php.fixed) containing values that should not be > >changed. The sequence is: require (phpESP.ini.php.default); ==> > >defaults, gets overwritten with every new release require > >(phpESP.ini.php); ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > >require (phpESP.ini.php.fixed); ==> fixed parts, you can change > >these, but they get overwritten with every new release > > > >- Web based updates and web based installs are now possible, no more > >manually entering sql statements in the db > > > >- Switching/changing database table prefixes is now possible > > > >- An answer to a question of type textbox, essay or numerical can now > >be required to be unique > > > >Any feedback is welcome. Enjoy! > > > >Franky > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference > >Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save > >$100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. > >http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone > >_______________________________________________ > >phpESP-general mailing list > >php...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-general > > Editor > Accessibility News > www.accessibilitynews.ca > ---- > Badeyes Design & Consulting > Specializing in Accessible Web Design > Phone: 705-357-2117 > Fax: 705-357-1833 > Url: http://www.badeyes.com > > > |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-04-12 12:20:56
|
Hi all, the latest and best of phpESP has been released: version 2.1.0. Many things have changed, but the most changing one is the split of the config file in 3 seperate files, allowing easier updates (see the CHANGELOG file). From the changelog: - Dashboard implementation (by Bishop Bettini) - start/stop date for a survey (by Bishop Bettini) - A conditional question resulted in a "non-required" for the question it depends on, this limit has been removed. - You can now do authenticated ldap binds when searching for the uid, some LDAP servers need this (is more secure than anonymous binds anyway) - A default config file has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.default), your own changes should go into admin/phpESP.ini.php. The advantage is that new options can be added to the default file and you don't need to change anything to your own config file. Also a fixed part has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.fixed) containing values that should not be changed. The sequence is: require (phpESP.ini.php.default); ==> defaults, gets overwritten with every new release require (phpESP.ini.php); ==> your own values, never gets overwritten require (phpESP.ini.php.fixed); ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get overwritten with every new release - Web based updates and web based installs are now possible, no more manually entering sql statements in the db - Switching/changing database table prefixes is now possible - An answer to a question of type textbox, essay or numerical can now be required to be unique Any feedback is welcome. Enjoy! Franky |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-04-06 17:30:19
|
Hi all, many updates have already happened to phpesp, causing the language file to be behind in their translations. I would like any of you to help out with the translations. The current languages are: da_DK de_DE el_GR en_US es_ES fi fi_FI fr_FR hu_HU it_IT ja_JP nl_NL pt_BR pt_PT sv_SE Most of these need updating, so if you want to help, let me know ... Just updating the file phpesp/locale/<LANGUAGE>/LC_MESSAGES/messages.po is already enough for me to go on. Franky |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-04-03 18:46:07
|
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:14:05 -0400 Bishop Bettini <ph...@id...> wrote: > Quoting Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...>: > > > How about this: > > I add the possibility to generate the SQL statements needed for the > > update, so you can save this to a file and execute it manually. > > > > That way you can update the files on your QA server, generate the > > SQL, test this as usual and then go to production with it. > > > > Let me know what you think about it ... I added this to svn now :) > > Sounds good to me! > > bishop > Hi all, the latest changes have been done and I feel confident the current svn is stable enough (don't worry Bishop, I fixed your 2 bugs :) So to all: time to test, I'm planning to release the new version pretty soon (maybe beta first, who knows ...). I'm not quite sure what to do with the config files though ... I like the config subdir idea the best, so unless somebody has serious objections, it will become: config/config.defaults.php config/config.php config/config.fixed.php config/README Franky btw Bishop: all mails from SF to you bounce ... |
From: Bishop B. <ph...@id...> - 2008-03-31 20:14:08
|
Quoting Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...>: > How about this: > I add the possibility to generate the SQL statements needed for the > update, so you can save this to a file and execute it manually. > > That way you can update the files on your QA server, generate the SQL, > test this as usual and then go to production with it. > > Let me know what you think about it ... I added this to svn now :) Sounds good to me! bishop -- Bishop Bettini ideacode, Inc. (main) +1 919 341 5170 / (fax) +1 919 521 4100 Visit us on the web at: ideacode.com Professional software research and development reviewmysoftware.com Improve sales! Review your software before you release bytejar.com Solutions to those annoying development problems |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-31 19:40:25
|
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:51:35 -0400 Bishop Bettini <ph...@id...> wrote: > Quoting Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...>: > > > I can add the same logic to the survey side if wanted. But what do > > you normally do when updating? Maybe we should just have a file > > called "disabled" or so, and as long as that file is there, all > > surveys appear offline (something like "The system is undergoing an > > update, please be patient"). What do you think? > > This is an important issue in my particular case, as at any given > time there can be up to 30,000 unique people hitting the surveys at > one time. In my situation, I tell Apache to redirect to a > maintenance page, then run the update from the command line using a > script that was previously tested on a QA server. Usually the update > implies only a few seconds of down-time, which is great. Whatever > process is chosen, it must be atomic, so create a lock file, flock() > it, and run the update. Might need a method to force the lock file > too, just in case something dies (server boot)? > > bishop > How about this: I add the possibility to generate the SQL statements needed for the update, so you can save this to a file and execute it manually. That way you can update the files on your QA server, generate the SQL, test this as usual and then go to production with it. Let me know what you think about it ... I added this to svn now :) Franky |
From: Bishop B. <ph...@id...> - 2008-03-31 18:51:37
|
Quoting Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...>: > I can add the same logic to the survey side if wanted. But what do you > normally do when updating? Maybe we should just have a file called > "disabled" or so, and as long as that file is there, all surveys appear > offline (something like "The system is undergoing an update, please be > patient"). What do you think? This is an important issue in my particular case, as at any given time there can be up to 30,000 unique people hitting the surveys at one time. In my situation, I tell Apache to redirect to a maintenance page, then run the update from the command line using a script that was previously tested on a QA server. Usually the update implies only a few seconds of down-time, which is great. Whatever process is chosen, it must be atomic, so create a lock file, flock() it, and run the update. Might need a method to force the lock file too, just in case something dies (server boot)? bishop -- Bishop Bettini ideacode, Inc. (main) +1 919 341 5170 / (fax) +1 919 521 4100 Visit us on the web at: ideacode.com Professional software research and development reviewmysoftware.com Improve sales! Review your software before you release bytejar.com Solutions to those annoying development problems |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-31 18:31:16
|
For your info: I made a small booboo in public/phpESP.first.php and public/signup.php, causing a config file not to be read. Is fixed now. So before you start testing: upate to the latest svn. Franky On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:41:06 +0200 Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...> wrote: > On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:49:35 -0400 > Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> wrote: > > > More thoughts about the DB update. If the version that the DB > > reports is the same as the version in the code, i.e. the schema > > versions match, then the DB update should do absolutely nothing. > > This makes giving the super-user the ability to do the update less > > "scary" and should work for Bishop's use case no? > > Hi, this is already the case. Once the update is done, no second > update is possible (since the versions match). See my comment below > as well. > > Bishop, you could update the phpESP code, immediately login as the > > super user and do the DB update. Then your user, super-users, could > > click update all day long and nothing would happen other than a page > > that says DB is already up to date. > > > > This brings up another issue we should handle, if the schema is > > mismatched, we should report on the admin side that the DB needs > > updating and then on deployed survey side, that submissions cannot > > be done at this time. > > If the versions mismatch, the only thing you can do on the admin side > is execute the update (all other links are not visible). Once the > update is done, the update link no longer shows and everything is back > to normal. > I can add the same logic to the survey side if wanted. But what do you > normally do when updating? Maybe we should just have a file called > "disabled" or so, and as long as that file is there, all surveys > appear offline (something like "The system is undergoing an update, > please be patient"). What do you think? > > Franky > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > phpESP-devel mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-devel > |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-31 17:46:17
|
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:49:35 -0400 Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> wrote: > More thoughts about the DB update. If the version that the DB > reports is the same as the version in the code, i.e. the schema > versions match, then the DB update should do absolutely nothing. > This makes giving the super-user the ability to do the update less > "scary" and should work for Bishop's use case no? Hi, this is already the case. Once the update is done, no second update is possible (since the versions match). See my comment below as well. > Bishop, you could update the phpESP code, immediately login as the > super user and do the DB update. Then your user, super-users, could > click update all day long and nothing would happen other than a page > that says DB is already up to date. > > This brings up another issue we should handle, if the schema is > mismatched, we should report on the admin side that the DB needs > updating and then on deployed survey side, that submissions cannot be > done at this time. If the versions mismatch, the only thing you can do on the admin side is execute the update (all other links are not visible). Once the update is done, the update link no longer shows and everything is back to normal. I can add the same logic to the survey side if wanted. But what do you normally do when updating? Maybe we should just have a file called "disabled" or so, and as long as that file is there, all surveys appear offline (something like "The system is undergoing an update, please be patient"). What do you think? Franky |
From: Matthew G. <mat...@gm...> - 2008-03-30 21:49:36
|
More thoughts about the DB update. If the version that the DB reports is the same as the version in the code, i.e. the schema versions match, then the DB update should do absolutely nothing. This makes giving the super-user the ability to do the update less "scary" and should work for Bishop's use case no? Bishop, you could update the phpESP code, immediately login as the super user and do the DB update. Then your user, super-users, could click update all day long and nothing would happen other than a page that says DB is already up to date. This brings up another issue we should handle, if the schema is mismatched, we should report on the admin side that the DB needs updating and then on deployed survey side, that submissions cannot be done at this time. On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 23:25 +0100, Franky Van Liedekerke wrote: > > > > Now I also plan an easier update: > > > 1) read config files > > > 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed > > > if version table in db doesn't exist > > > ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable > > See comment I made about the suggested version in my reply to the SVN > > diff email. > > See my reply in private. > > > > if version table in db exists ==> take that one > > > 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > > > 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > > > 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed > > > and the DB prefix added if needed > > > 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script > > > for prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config > > > file when executed > > > > > > Any comments? > > I like the idea of allowing DB updates inside the application, we just > > need to be darn sure not to destroy anything ;-) > > Indeed, but as always: one should always take a backup before doing an > upgrade, even on command line. > > Franky -- Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-30 21:20:08
|
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:13:14 -0400 Bishop Bettini <ph...@id...> wrote: > > Well, it's completely controlable: only the superuser can do the > > update. If you're able to update the files on the webserver, I think > > you can be trusted to do the db updates as well, no? And a good > > admin never gives out the superuser password to somebody else :) > > I'm not sure I was clear. The super user account has access to > survey-oriented functionality that's unavailable to survey > designers. That implies that the super-user still maintains surveys, > just of a higher caliber. With the addition of this change, that > person is now also responsible/able to upgrade the application. > > In some circumstances, great; it's needed. But in others, it's a > separated concern that now has no separation. My usage falls into > the latter category. I maintain the software and the server, but a > client manages the surveys (deleting, cross-tabulating, etc.): I > would not want the client upgrading the software willy-nilly. I understand your concern, but most applications act alike (almost all CMS's as well): there is a superuser that does the update. Maybe here the "superuser" is in fact "application administrator". In that case, we can always create a new user that has - so to say - DB admin rights (DB maintanance). But for the transition period (where people upgrade, this is a bit difficult ... > > Wether you do them via web or manually, that's exactly the same. > > And there are no inputs from the user requested: because of the xml > > method, the update goes completely transparant, no matter which > > version you came from (the same goes for the prefix updates that > > are now possible). > > There _is_ a user input: initiate the upgrade. In my usage, I don't > want the super user initiating an upgrade. Sure, I can one off the > code, but it seems to me the ability to upgrade should be a > capability that can be assigned. Correct, but as always: when you do an update, you alert the admin of the application (just in case), not? But anyway, the DB admin right should be assignable ... > > I invite you to try it out first, before going into more details. > > (I tried a 2.0.2 update: worked fine. I tried a fresh install: > > worked fine). > > I'll certainly try it out. :) great, let me know what you like about it :) Franky |
From: Bishop B. <ph...@id...> - 2008-03-30 20:13:35
|
> Well, it's completely controlable: only the superuser can do the > update. If you're able to update the files on the webserver, I think > you can be trusted to do the db updates as well, no? And a good admin > never gives out the superuser password to somebody else :) I'm not sure I was clear. The super user account has access to survey-oriented functionality that's unavailable to survey designers. That implies that the super-user still maintains surveys, just of a higher caliber. With the addition of this change, that person is now also responsible/able to upgrade the application. In some circumstances, great; it's needed. But in others, it's a separated concern that now has no separation. My usage falls into the latter category. I maintain the software and the server, but a client manages the surveys (deleting, cross-tabulating, etc.): I would not want the client upgrading the software willy-nilly. > Wether you do them via web or manually, that's exactly the same. > And there are no inputs from the user requested: because of the xml method, > the update goes completely transparant, no matter which version you > came from (the same goes for the prefix updates that are now possible). There _is_ a user input: initiate the upgrade. In my usage, I don't want the super user initiating an upgrade. Sure, I can one off the code, but it seems to me the ability to upgrade should be a capability that can be assigned. > I invite you to try it out first, before going into more details. > (I tried a 2.0.2 update: worked fine. I tried a fresh install: worked > fine). I'll certainly try it out. :) bishop -- Bishop Bettini ideacode, Inc. (main) +1 919 341 5170 / (fax) +1 919 521 4100 Visit us on the web at: ideacode.com Professional software research and development reviewmysoftware.com Improve sales! Review your software before you release bytejar.com Solutions to those annoying development problems |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-30 19:37:21
|
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:20:23 -0400 Bishop Bettini <ph...@id...> wrote: > Or a BSD style config.d directory could be adopted, where every file > in said directory was read? I suppose it really depends upon the > goal. Hmm ... I'm trying to keep the changes minimal, people don't like it when things change too hard too often ... > >> if version table in db exists ==> take that one > >> 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > >> 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > >> 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be > >> parsed and the DB prefix added if needed > >> 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script > >> for prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config > >> file when executed > >> > >> Any comments? > > I like the idea of allowing DB updates inside the application, we > > just need to be darn sure not to destroy anything ;-) > > Personally, web-accessible db maintenance makes me nervous. How is > access controlled? It doesn't seem like "administrator" is enough, > as there are "survey" administrators and "db" administrators. If I > could control who could do it, different story; but if not, makes me > nervous that Janet the survey admin gets click happy and does > something ill-advised. Well, it's completely controlable: only the superuser can do the update. If you're able to update the files on the webserver, I think you can be trusted to do the db updates as well, no? And a good admin never gives out the superuser password to somebody else :) Wether you do them via web or manually, that's exactly the same. And there are no inputs from the user requested: because of the xml method, the update goes completely transparant, no matter which version you came from (the same goes for the prefix updates that are now possible). I invite you to try it out first, before going into more details. (I tried a 2.0.2 update: worked fine. I tried a fresh install: worked fine). Franky |
From: Bishop B. <ph...@id...> - 2008-03-30 19:20:29
|
[snip] > I propose: > require (config_defaults.php); > ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release > require (config.php); > ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > require (config_fixed.php); > ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get overwritten Why not a configs/ directory? Eg: [bishop@predator tmp]$ tree configs/ configs/ |-- default.php |-- fixed.php `-- local.php Or a BSD style config.d directory could be adopted, where every file in said directory was read? I suppose it really depends upon the goal. >> if version table in db exists ==> take that one >> 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted >> 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, >> 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed >> and the DB prefix added if needed >> 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script for >> prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config file >> when executed >> >> Any comments? > I like the idea of allowing DB updates inside the application, we just > need to be darn sure not to destroy anything ;-) Personally, web-accessible db maintenance makes me nervous. How is access controlled? It doesn't seem like "administrator" is enough, as there are "survey" administrators and "db" administrators. If I could control who could do it, different story; but if not, makes me nervous that Janet the survey admin gets click happy and does something ill-advised. I am a proponent of Phing's dbdeploy task, which makes it trivially easy to patch a deployment -- in a single command -- complete with undo. bishop -- Bishop Bettini ideacode, Inc. (main) +1 919 341 5170 / (fax) +1 919 521 4100 Visit us on the web at: ideacode.com Professional software research and development reviewmysoftware.com Improve sales! Review your software before you release bytejar.com Solutions to those annoying development problems |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-30 13:31:19
|
I worked on it a bit more: Now install and upgrade of the DB is webbased, using ADODB xml format, which makes it db independant and thus magically working for all db's supported by adodb. Now, using the adodb xml format, adding/changing a prefix should be very easy to do ... next thing on my list Franky On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:25:16 +0100 Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...> wrote: > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:58:00 -0400 > Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> wrote: > > > Splitting the file in this way seems reasonable. Wouldn't we want > > the file names to be *.php, so they can't be accidentally > > viewable? And since we are renaming, I don't see any reason to > > keep the phpESP.ini name. > > > > I propose: > > require (config_defaults.php); > > ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release > > require (config.php); > > ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > > require (config_fixed.php); > > ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get > > overwritten > > Well, the idea was to make the upgrade as painless as possible, but > then again: what's in a name :) If anybody else doesn't object to a > name change? > > > > Now I also plan an easier update: > > > 1) read config files > > > 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed > > > if version table in db doesn't exist > > > ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable > > See comment I made about the suggested version in my reply to the > > SVN diff email. > > See my reply in private. > > > > if version table in db exists ==> take that one > > > 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > > > 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > > > 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be > > > parsed and the DB prefix added if needed > > > 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script > > > for prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config > > > file when executed > > > > > > Any comments? > > I like the idea of allowing DB updates inside the application, we > > just need to be darn sure not to destroy anything ;-) > > Indeed, but as always: one should always take a backup before doing an > upgrade, even on command line. > > Franky > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > phpESP-devel mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-devel > |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-29 22:30:18
|
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:58:00 -0400 Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> wrote: > Splitting the file in this way seems reasonable. Wouldn't we want the > file names to be *.php, so they can't be accidentally viewable? And > since we are renaming, I don't see any reason to keep the phpESP.ini > name. > > I propose: > require (config_defaults.php); > ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release > require (config.php); > ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > require (config_fixed.php); > ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get > overwritten Well, the idea was to make the upgrade as painless as possible, but then again: what's in a name :) If anybody else doesn't object to a name change? > > Now I also plan an easier update: > > 1) read config files > > 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed > > if version table in db doesn't exist > > ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable > See comment I made about the suggested version in my reply to the SVN > diff email. See my reply in private. > > if version table in db exists ==> take that one > > 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > > 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > > 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed > > and the DB prefix added if needed > > 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script > > for prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config > > file when executed > > > > Any comments? > I like the idea of allowing DB updates inside the application, we just > need to be darn sure not to destroy anything ;-) Indeed, but as always: one should always take a backup before doing an upgrade, even on command line. Franky |
From: Matthew G. <mat...@gm...> - 2008-03-29 18:58:59
|
For the LDAP changes, I have access to an AD that I can test against and will give it a go next week. On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 17:14 +0100, Franky Van Liedekerke wrote: > Hi all, > > for the database updates: the code is already in svn, and should even > work for older versions (from 1.8.2 onwards). > If you log in as administrator, you will see only one link when a db > update is needed. It is basic, but fully functional. > I haven't added the prefix script yet, that is for later. > I would appreciate some testing from you guys ... > > Franky > > > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:57:48 +0100 > Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I changed some parts of the phpESP config: > > > > - You can now do authenticated ldap binds when searching for the uid, > > MS AD needs this (is more secure than anonymous binds anyway) > > > > - A default config file has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.default), > > your own changes should go into admin/phpESP.ini.php. The advantage is > > that new options can be added to the default file and you don't need > > to change anything to your own config file. Also a fixed part has been > > added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.fixed) containing values that should not > > be changed. > > The sequence is: > > require (phpESP.ini.php.default); > > ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release > > require (phpESP.ini.php); > > ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > > require (phpESP.ini.php.fixed); > > ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get > > overwritten every new release > > > > > > Now I also plan an easier update: > > 1) read config files > > 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed > > if version table in db doesn't exist > > ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable > > if version table in db exists ==> take that one > > 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > > 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > > 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed > > and the DB prefix added if needed > > 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script for > > prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config file > > when executed > > > > Any comments? > > > > Franky > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > > just about anything Open Source. > > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > > _______________________________________________ > > phpESP-devel mailing list > > php...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > phpESP-devel mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-devel -- Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> |
From: Matthew G. <mat...@gm...> - 2008-03-29 18:57:56
|
See below On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 11:57 +0100, Franky Van Liedekerke wrote: > - A default config file has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.default), > your own changes should go into admin/phpESP.ini.php. The advantage is > that new options can be added to the default file and you don't need to > change anything to your own config file. Also a fixed part has been > added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.fixed) containing values that should not be > changed. > The sequence is: > require (phpESP.ini.php.default); > ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release > require (phpESP.ini.php); > ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > require (phpESP.ini.php.fixed); > ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get overwritten > every new release Splitting the file in this way seems reasonable. Wouldn't we want the file names to be *.php, so they can't be accidentally viewable? And since we are renaming, I don't see any reason to keep the phpESP.ini name. I propose: require (config_defaults.php); ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release require (config.php); ==> your own values, never gets overwritten require (config_fixed.php); ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get overwritten > > Now I also plan an easier update: > 1) read config files > 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed > if version table in db doesn't exist > ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable See comment I made about the suggested version in my reply to the SVN diff email. > if version table in db exists ==> take that one > 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed > and the DB prefix added if needed > 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script for > prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config file > when executed > > Any comments? I like the idea of allowing DB updates inside the application, we just need to be darn sure not to destroy anything ;-) > > Franky > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > phpESP-devel mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-devel -- Matthew Gregg <mat...@gm...> |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-29 16:19:05
|
Hi all, for the database updates: the code is already in svn, and should even work for older versions (from 1.8.2 onwards). If you log in as administrator, you will see only one link when a db update is needed. It is basic, but fully functional. I haven't added the prefix script yet, that is for later. I would appreciate some testing from you guys ... Franky On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:57:48 +0100 Franky Van Liedekerke <lie...@te...> wrote: > Hi, > > I changed some parts of the phpESP config: > > - You can now do authenticated ldap binds when searching for the uid, > MS AD needs this (is more secure than anonymous binds anyway) > > - A default config file has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.default), > your own changes should go into admin/phpESP.ini.php. The advantage is > that new options can be added to the default file and you don't need > to change anything to your own config file. Also a fixed part has been > added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.fixed) containing values that should not > be changed. > The sequence is: > require (phpESP.ini.php.default); > ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release > require (phpESP.ini.php); > ==> your own values, never gets overwritten > require (phpESP.ini.php.fixed); > ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get > overwritten every new release > > > Now I also plan an easier update: > 1) read config files > 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed > if version table in db doesn't exist > ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable > if version table in db exists ==> take that one > 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted > 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, > 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed > and the DB prefix added if needed > 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script for > prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config file > when executed > > Any comments? > > Franky > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > phpESP-devel mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpesp-devel > |
From: Franky V. L. <lie...@te...> - 2008-03-29 11:02:48
|
Hi, I changed some parts of the phpESP config: - You can now do authenticated ldap binds when searching for the uid, MS AD needs this (is more secure than anonymous binds anyway) - A default config file has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.default), your own changes should go into admin/phpESP.ini.php. The advantage is that new options can be added to the default file and you don't need to change anything to your own config file. Also a fixed part has been added (admin/phpESP.ini.php.fixed) containing values that should not be changed. The sequence is: require (phpESP.ini.php.default); ==> defaults, gets overwritten every new release require (phpESP.ini.php); ==> your own values, never gets overwritten require (phpESP.ini.php.fixed); ==> fixed parts, you can change these, but they get overwritten every new release Now I also plan an easier update: 1) read config files 2) check version of phpesp in db with the one in phpESP.ini.fixed if version table in db doesn't exist ==> suggest version=2.0.2, is changeable if version table in db exists ==> take that one 3) show a link to take db backup if wanted 4) show a link to execute the update scenario: 2.0.2==>2.0.3, 2.0.3==>2.0.4, ... for this, the update db scripts need to be parsed and the DB prefix added if needed 5) if update ok and tables contain no prefix: show link to script for prefix update, and warns it needs to be changed in the config file when executed Any comments? Franky |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-03-28 16:15:39
|
Bugs item #1928055, was opened at 2008-03-28 16:32 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by liedekef You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1928055&group_id=8956 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: SQL Group: v1.6.1 >Status: Closed >Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: negative numbers in rating scale output Initial Comment: the output from a survey using rating scales with values 0-10 includes -1 responses what does -1 mean is it a missing value? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Franky Van Liedekerke (liedekef) Date: 2008-03-28 17:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=109671 Originator: NO Please upgrade to the latest version, this bug has already been fixed after version 1.6.1 Franky ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1928055&group_id=8956 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-03-28 16:12:29
|
Bugs item #1928055, was opened at 2008-03-28 16:32 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by liedekef You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1928055&group_id=8956 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: SQL Group: v1.6.1 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: negative numbers in rating scale output Initial Comment: the output from a survey using rating scales with values 0-10 includes -1 responses what does -1 mean is it a missing value? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Franky Van Liedekerke (liedekef) Date: 2008-03-28 17:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=109671 Originator: NO Please upgrade to the latest version, this bug has already been fixed after version 1.6.1 Franky ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1928055&group_id=8956 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-03-28 15:32:44
|
Bugs item #1928055, was opened at 2008-03-28 08:32 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1928055&group_id=8956 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: SQL Group: v1.6.1 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: negative numbers in rating scale output Initial Comment: the output from a survey using rating scales with values 0-10 includes -1 responses what does -1 mean is it a missing value? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1928055&group_id=8956 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-03-27 21:35:20
|
Bugs item #1927139, was opened at 2008-03-27 15:26 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by liedekef You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1927139&group_id=8956 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Matthew Gregg (greggmc) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: !other isn't handled correctly for Rate questions Initial Comment: If !other is added to a rate question and that question is required, the survey cannot be submitted. The !other is either not supported with rate question or not being show on the survey. It either needs to be ignored if someone adds to a survey or displayed/supported correctly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Franky Van Liedekerke (liedekef) Date: 2008-03-27 22:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=109671 Originator: NO True and fixed in svn. See the changes for admin/include/function/survey_update.inc ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1927139&group_id=8956 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-03-27 14:26:14
|
Bugs item #1927139, was opened at 2008-03-27 09:26 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1927139&group_id=8956 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Matthew Gregg (greggmc) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: !other isn't handled correctly for Rate questions Initial Comment: If !other is added to a rate question and that question is required, the survey cannot be submitted. The !other is either not supported with rate question or not being show on the survey. It either needs to be ignored if someone adds to a survey or displayed/supported correctly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=108956&aid=1927139&group_id=8956 |