[drupal-devel] Stability of DB schema in 4.6 RC?
Good morning, all. I'm in a quandary, and am looking for some advice from my fellow coders. My local "sandbox" of Drupal is at version 4.5.2, and needs to stay there for now because I'm actively working on two modules for the open Drupal community plus one module for my employer (nothing secret, but it's so company-specific that it's useless to the Open Source community, else I'd release it GPL). So, I haven't even touched the CVS HEAD version or played with anything at 4.6 level yet. The plan is to finish my modules at 4.5.x, then update them for 4.6, because I really want to offer them for *both* versions in production. Here's the question: I need to quickly (as in, "this week") deploy three *non-production* Drupal sub-sites under a common virtual host, or under three separate virtual hosts. The sites can be a little unstable for now, because end users won't see them for several weeks. But I do need to get them online for the content creation team to start building nodes and taxonomy. Since the sites can wait to go production, it occurs to me that it might be smarter to go ahead and put the CVS HEAD version of Drupal on there, since: 1. It would keep me from having to upgrade the DB tables later, 2. It gives me a convenient sandbox to start making my modules 4.6 compatible without breaking my existing development sandbox, 3. It lets me train the content creators (some of whom are not previously Drupal-experienced) *once*, in only the upcoming 4.6 user interface, 4. If I recall from this list, there are new features in 4.6 for the specific support of multiple logical sites with a single Drupal install -- which would greatly simplify my life. Now, being a developer, I fully realize that the 4.6 *code* isn't stable yet, may give errors or utterly crash, etc. I'm okay with that. But my question is, how stable is the *database schema* for core Drupal at this time? Are we likely to see any further table layout changes at this point, or is it *reasonably* safe to assume, "When 4.6 production comes out, I can nuke the CVS code and replace it with the released code, but won't have to modify the database?" Comments welcome, and thanks. Scott -- -----------------------+------------------------------------------------------ Scott Courtney | "I don't mind Microsoft making money. I mind them scott@4th.com | having a bad operating system." -- Linus Torvalds http://4th.com/ | ("The Rebel Code," NY Times, 21 February 1999) | PGP Public Key at http://4th.com/keys/scott.pubkey
question is, how stable is the *database schema* for core Drupal at this time? Are we likely to see any further table layout changes at this point, or is it *reasonably* safe to assume, "When 4.6 production comes out, I can nuke the CVS code and replace it with the released code, but won't have to modify the database?"
From my understanding we are less than a week from a release candidate. At this stage, a schema changing is not likely. NK
Op dinsdag 1 maart 2005 16:00, schreef Scott Courtney:
Now, being a developer, I fully realize that the 4.6 *code* isn't stable yet, may give errors or utterly crash, etc. I'm okay with that. But my question is, how stable is the *database schema* for core Drupal at this time? HEAD is fairly stable ATM. It might have some bugs, but surely won't crash on you. Drupal.org is running it too.
Are we likely to see any further table layout changes at this point, or is it *reasonably* safe to assume, "When 4.6 production comes out, I can nuke the CVS code and replace it with the released code, but won't have to modify the database?"
Since we are in a feature freeze already, the asnwer is "most probably not". But that is no guarantee. Regards, Bèr -- [ Bèr Kessels | Drupal services www.webschuur.com ]
Are we likely to see any further table layout changes at this point, or is it *reasonably* safe to assume, "When 4.6 production comes out, I can nuke the CVS code and replace it with the released code, but won't have to modify the database?"
Since we are in a feature freeze already, the asnwer is "most probably not". But that is no guarantee.
...and even if there is a change, it's not that big a deal to update the schema. I have been developing a couple of websites using HEAD, and have done a couple of database schema upgrades already without a problem (although the upgrade script was broken a couple of days ago).
On Tuesday 01 March 2005 10:00, Scott Courtney wrote:
how stable is the *database schema* for core Drupal at this time? Are we likely to see any further table layout changes at this point, or is it *reasonably* safe to assume, "When 4.6 production comes out, I can nuke the CVS code and replace it with the released code, but won't have to modify the database?"
Thanks to all who replied on this thread. You've answered my question, and it seems I'm reasonably safe to go ahead with the HEAD version. If something odd happens and a small schema change results, I can live with that. Thanks! Scott -- -----------------------+------------------------------------------------------ Scott Courtney | "I don't mind Microsoft making money. I mind them scott@4th.com | having a bad operating system." -- Linus Torvalds http://4th.com/ | ("The Rebel Code," NY Times, 21 February 1999) | PGP Public Key at http://4th.com/keys/scott.pubkey
participants (4)
-
Bèr Kessels -
Negyesi Karoly -
Ross Kendall -
Scott Courtney