Rebuild the old posts on here?

[TSP]

Hi, reading old topics on here can be a bit of a chore right now, due to the converter not having converted things properly. Quotes are missing etc. 

I'm unsure as to whether I should report these or whether they'll likely already fixed. 

Do you plan on attempting another rebuild of the post data for old posts from before the upgrade here? It would help us feel safer that more conversion bugs have been fixed etc.  

[bfarber]

Yes, we are planning and working on rebuilding some of the old posts here.  It's not as simple as just re-running the rebuild routine - once the post is destroyed it is gone.  We are rebuilding on a backup and testing the old vs new post content to ensure it is all rebuilt correctly and will port it over once that is finished.

[TSP]

Yes, we are planning and working on rebuilding some of the old posts here.  It's not as simple as just re-running the rebuild routine - once the post is destroyed it is gone.  We are rebuilding on a backup and testing the old vs new post content to ensure it is all rebuilt correctly and will port it over once that is finished.

I understand you have to have a separate copy etc. to test on first. And it's obviously not done in a second. 

But isn't it just a matter of:

• Select post rows from 3.4.7 database (from before the upgrade)
• Rebuild the retrieved post content with the rebuild post function used for the background process in IPS 4
• Run update query on the corresponding post with the rebuild post function (Maybe take into account whether the post has been edited after the upgrade)

Although it sounds like your approach is probably: 

• Set up 3.4.7 copy from the backup
• Upgrade the backup to 4.0 with fixed rebuild routine
• Select newly rebuilt posts from the newly upgraded 4.0 installation and update corresponding posts in the live community board DB

Which do you go with? I would imagine the first approach would be better to more constantly test the rebuild routine, but the second option may provide a more stable and consistent final result. 

And when I say "post", then I also mean blog entries, comments etc. 

 

[bfarber]

We went with the second result because rebuilding is one facet (and one which we do care about), but the upgrader in general and testing it thoroughly is important as well.  Just because we got this site upgraded doesn't mean the upgrader was 100% bug free - we felt re-running it against a large "real" database was useful to shake out some lingering issues.

 

The rebuild routines are almost done on our backup.

[Jon Matcho]

I do not understand why IPS had to "upgrade" these production forums rather than do so in a test conversion in a test environment.

Considering the decimation of content, this was a mistake in my opinion and sends the message to the world "this is what our stuff looks like, like it?"  These forums were not ready for the move and whatever benefit was imagined from doing the "upgrade" brings little to the client community.

Anyway, the issue is that the Downloads/Files/Marketplace and most all legacy topics/posts are absolutely painful to use. 

Regards,
Jon
core_member_rank_45 (?!)
unable to set a real profile signature

[Andrej]

I do not understand why IPS had to "upgrade" these production forums rather than do so in a test conversion in a test environment.

​It better that they find the remaining bugs and issue on their own production forum rather than you find them on yours.  See also this comment:

[Jon Matcho]

 

​Design for speed, sure, but until the functionality is solid do not release in a production environment (yes, THIS is a production environment!)

[Jon Matcho]

​It better that they find the remaining bugs and issue on their own production forum rather than you find them on yours.

Well, yes, technically speaking.  ​It's also better if they don't launch any nuclear weapons.

My production forum will not have this software until it's ready, no matter how the test phase is done...

 

[bfarber]

We did upgrade a backup of our company forums before upgrading the live server.  We shook at as many bugs as we could there, and then upgraded here to help us along the path to stabilizing the software for wider release.

 

We encourage you not to upgrade your site until the software has gone "final" and is in a stable supported release, definitely.

[Jon Matcho]

We did upgrade a backup of our company forums before upgrading the live server.  We shook at as many bugs as we could there, and then upgraded here to help us along the path to stabilizing the software for wider release.

I do not agree with the decision to regard an important resource and entire community (these support forums and those using them) to be a 'test bed'.  

Whatever the reasoning, the results are in black and white.  As a customer I am disappointed and frustrated at the moment.

[Charles]

Why are you disappointed? All we are doing is putting IPS4 through the paces on our site here before we give it on to you. This means that when you get it we have already dealt with any issues on our own site here. That is a good practice and I think the most efficient way to give you a great product. Besides, it's the way we have done it for 12 years.

[Jon Matcho]

 

Why are you disappointed? All we are doing is putting IPS4 through the paces on our site here before we give it on to you.

All of the testing Brandon mentioned should have been done outside of these community-driven forums, which I would hope you recognize as extremely important and critical to the success of the software and the overall community involved (existing clients, developers, users, and prospective clients).  The forums are now painful to use, even to read.  

By considering this production support/community forum as a test environment IPS has nearly destroyed the usefulness of prior posts by rendering them nearly unreadable, and leaves me feeling like an unwilling guinea pig.

...when you get it we have already dealt with any issues on our own site here.

​I don't disagree; that's how production commercial software is expected to be delivered.

That is a good practice and I think the most efficient way to give you a great product.

I respectfully disagree.  Do you think it's good to trash these forums so that years of community-driven information becomes difficult to read ("painful" as others have said)?  What is good and efficient about most all posts becoming unreadable with BBCode littered throughout?  Attached is an example of what once was a nicely ordered bulleted list.

Besides, it's the way we have done it for 12 years.

​With all due respect, consider doing your clients, company, and software a favor by not using those words ever again.

"If you have always done it that way, it's probably wrong." - Charles Kettering.

Google:  "that's the way we've always done it"

Dilbert

 

 

[Andrej]

You're blowing this way out of proportion. Brogan already wrote that they are working on rebuilding the old content. In all honesty, if it bothers you so much, take some days off from this site. You seem all over a temporary issue, which is not worth using all of your energy on. 

[Jon Matcho]

It's been "temporary" for well over a month and also appears to be the reason why prior posts are less-than-readable in places as well (which is permanent).  It's not temporary when you're trying to research, learn, or expand the use of the IPS suite of products for one's own customers and have deadlines and are reminded of it every single visit no matter how many days off one takes from this site.

I'm not alone with this, and others are worried about being kicked off this forum or have their client "privilege" revoked if speaking up.

[bfarber]

I am sorry that you are upset about the rebuild process that occurred here.  You'll be happy to know that by testing this here on our forums, it won't affect *you* when you upgrade.