<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im">
> Only if they ask for new functionality and the cost of implementing it<br>
> is cheaper if an upgrade is involved should the client be expected to<br>
> change to the new shiny Drupal<br>
</div><br>This is where I disagree, in regards to making the decision based on<br>
what is cheaper (right now).<br>
<br>
What I am advocating is that consultants make the Drupal 6 upgrade<br>
required before implementing new features on a Drupal 5 site, even if<br>
that is MORE expensive (right now) than implementing said features in<br>
Drupal 5.<br>
</blockquote></div><br>Matt,<br><br>Are you actually suggesting that developers should refuse to add features to Drupal 5 sites even if they never told the client when they first built the Drupal 5 site that they were going to be doing this?<br>
<br>That seems incredibly unfair to clients, especially those with limited budgets. <br><br>In truth, I wouldn't even consider having clients agree to this for future sites. If I did, I'd have to say, ok, I'm going to build your site in Drupal 6 today, but at some point in the future I'm going to refuse to add any new features unless you spend X dollars to upgrade to Drupal 7 -- and if we're talking about a heavily customized site that X can be many thousands of dollars. <br>
<br>I've still got a couple of 4.7 sites that are serving nonprofit clients very well and they are very happy with them. I'd like it if they paid for an upgrade, but I can't imagine requiring them to do so.<br>
<br>Sam<br><br><br><br><br>