Invision Community 4: SEO, prepare for v5 and dormant account notifications By Matt Monday at 02:04 PM
taz.de Posted October 14, 2019 Posted October 14, 2019 hi, i just upgraded from 4.2.9 to 4.4.7. that upgrade shreddered the content in a similar way like the upgrade 3 -> 4 did and as i described in this post: let me give you an example: in one post there is this line (in the database): <br /><a href="http://friedenswinter.de/aufruf/" target='_blank'>http://friedenswinter.de/aufruf/</a> after the upgrade the line is changed to what i will attach to this message. which is no valid HTML anymore. does anyone knows where that post-parsing method resides so that i could comment it out / change it? of course it would be better if invision would check their code that i don't have to have fear when the next upgrade comes, i am talking with the support but it seems to be problematic for the support to see the problem. regards, ulf
Stuart Silvester Posted October 14, 2019 Posted October 14, 2019 Upgrading within the 4.x series would not rebuild any existing post/comment data in your database. This is only done when you upgrade from 3.4.x or lower. Your screenshot suggests that you're using a custom script to output the post content, perhaps that is causing the output to be malformed?
taz.de Posted October 14, 2019 Author Posted October 14, 2019 no. the script straight puts out the content of the database in a xml field. are you 100% sure that there is no code which manipulates posts while the upgrade process?
Stuart Silvester Posted October 14, 2019 Posted October 14, 2019 3 hours ago, taz.de said: no. the script straight puts out the content of the database in a xml field. are you 100% sure that there is no code which manipulates posts while the upgrade process? I'm absolutely certain, only editing the post will perform some parsing on the post (however, not the same level of parsing that an upgrade from 3.x does).
taz.de Posted November 7, 2019 Author Posted November 7, 2019 dear @Stuart Silvester, i have to apologize, this was my fault and a problem of old data in our test environment. so at least, no problem at all. no offence!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.