Aiwa Posted October 24, 2013 Posted October 24, 2013 All software products do have bugs at some point. I'm sure the software you reference has bugs in other portions of the software that you may or may not notice. This is just the fact of software development. As a premium software, IPS has indeed fixed this issue, released a patch for their latest version and is releasing a new point release to address this for everyone. In many case, patches for the current version are not supplied, the only path to fix is an upgrade. It is unfortunate that your support has expired, but that's not something that can hold against IPS. You are most welcome to try and port the fix back to your version.
Schot Posted October 24, 2013 Author Posted October 24, 2013 Actually, the free software I referenced, (Mediawiki which Wikipedia and Wikia operate on), has been a godsend and blissfully robust since I started using it in 2007. I don't agree with the notion that bugs should be an accepted norm of purchased software and although I don't really feel the need to debate it I do think it's important to make the distinction that I personally don't support that idea. The way this reality is being used here is not the norm "out there". When I buy games and software I get bug fixes free of charge years after release. I have no intention of giving any more money to IPS since I know that a major release is on the way. Who knows how long that will take though. So I guess I'll be reading up on how to fix an IPS bug once again. Time I would much rather spend on the several projects I'd like to be working on for my wiki like a recent template I started building or creating new custom google maps like the one I have on my wiki. It's a major moral down for me and my community even when the solution is probably quite simple for IPS though outside my scope of experience. It's quite disheartening to read "just pay up" from staff really...
bfarber Posted October 24, 2013 Posted October 24, 2013 I do apologize for your frustration and sympathize with your situation. Bugs are unfortunate when they come up. That being said, whether you agree with the notion that all software has bugs or not...it's true. As a developer for 10+ years, I've yet to see any major software package used by a large number of users that does not have any bugs what-so-ever. Regardless, when a software package DOES have bugs, the vendor will build a new version and release it. In our case (as with many vendors supplying paid software solutions), we require your license to be active in order to gain access to updates. When there is a major issue affecting many users, we sometimes post KB articles with patches freely available to anyone. Unfortunately for you, in this case, those patches are almost ALWAYS built against the current release at that time (in this case 3.4.5), and we do not spend time backporting fixes for to older point releases. You will need to upgrade to 3.4.5 and install the patch (or wait for 3.4.6) in order to gain access to that fix as well as many others. Similarly, when we receive security reports, we only patch them against the latest release of each series (i.e. the latest 3.3.x release, the latest 3.4.x release, and so on). I am sorry that this is not the answer you want to hear, but honestly it's the same process for every single software company in existence. Even if you consider a company like Microsoft and Windows - when they fix a new bug reported in Windows the patch they deliver will consider and expect that previous patches they have released have been installed, or will be alongside the new patch. Before you mention it, I realize that Microsoft provides free patches for Windows - this is not the point. The point is that patches will very often require previous changes that have already been released be installed, and this situation is no different.
Dmacleo Posted October 24, 2013 Posted October 24, 2013 this may have been mentioned and I easily could have missed it, but can the patch be compared to the 3.4.3 file and fairly easily be made to work? although to see what fixes the actual issue you may need the org 3.4.5 file.
bfarber Posted October 25, 2013 Posted October 25, 2013 this may have been mentioned and I easily could have missed it, but can the patch be compared to the 3.4.3 file and fairly easily be made to work? although to see what fixes the actual issue you may need the org 3.4.5 file. No, not exactly. The problem is that while this file is isolated (it's actually a third party file that we have not previously modified), changes in other files (such as admin/sources/classes/editor/composite.php and admin/classes/sources/text/parser.php) directly affect the outcome as well, and those files (as well as others) have also changed drastically since 3.4.3. Thus, simply editing this one file does not integrate the required changes in OTHER files that would be needed for these changes to fully function as expected.
Dmacleo Posted October 25, 2013 Posted October 25, 2013 ahh, makes sense. shoot, that sort of sucks :(
Josh H. Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 17 minutes ago, Nixniz said: lol and in IPB version 4 i have same problem Where are you seeing problems? Can you please provide an example URL that is not being processed correctly? I am not able to reproduce any issues using the example link provided earlier in this topic, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hart's_Rules
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.