Yeah! Which version of MySql is running on the legacy site. You might need to export the db contents in a newer version. You can easily check that out, though, with a quick test (if you can easily move the existing site to a modern setup, you should be ok).
If you can't test the data you should find out what the host is running.
But the fact that you say there are no modules other than image (assuming no encoding problems on the filenames also) and only 1200 nodes leads me to believe it is relatively straightforward.
Victor Kane http://awebfactory.com.ar
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Chris Johnson cxjohnson@gmail.com wrote:
I did roughly the same migration for a small civic-action group's site I maintain. I had problems with large pieces of content in nodes disappearing because of a subtle change some place in character set handling. The MySQL database software was not changed; the hosting company was the same through out.
I also had some other problem (don't recall the specifics as it was more than a year ago), which necessitated me redoing the entire chain migration over. Be sure you keep backups of each step along the way!
The upshot is that although in theory it should be very simple, you may well hit unexpected snags. Be prepared to have to spend many extra hours fixing them.
Good luck.
..chris
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Bill Fitzgeraldbill@funnymonkey.com wrote:
Hello, Shai,
In the interests of protecting both you and your client from the
surprises
that will likely be lurking within either the data, the hosting config,
or
the content, I would be very clear that your initial bid represents an estimate, but that the actual hours for the job can only really be known when you start interacting with the data (aka, doing the work).
In some cases, we treat upgrades from older versions more like data migrations than upgrades. It depends on the job, and the amount of data,
but
sometimes that can be a useful context for the work.
I would also ask what the client wants to gain from the upgrade. Do they just want to preserve the existing functionality within an updated
codebase,
or do they want to begin to leverage some of the architectural
improvements
that are possible with D6 (like, for example, moving from Image to Filefield/Imagefield/CCK)?
My .02.
Cheers,
Bill
Shai Gluskin wrote:
Hi Gang,
I'm bidding on a site upgrade which is currently running on Drupal
4.5.5.
The good (actually great) news is that there are no non-core modules
running
except for the image module. I haven't had direct access to the db and
the
node content page isn't filterable by content type in 4.5, out of the
1280
nodes, I believe that fewer than 50 are images.
I figure I'd upgrade to the last 4.5 release which was 4.5.8, then to 4.6.11, then to 4.7.11, 5.19, 6.13.
The db is MySQL. There are 1280 nodes. There is one vocabulary with
about
130 terms. No important blocks. It's running a minimally customized
version
of Bluemarine. But I'm throwing the theme out completely, anyway.
Even though it is five upgrades, this looks like it will be simple. Am I deluding myself? Are there any gotchas that I'm not seeing? Any advice, especially about what I may not be thinking of, would be most
appreciated.
Thanks,
Shai
-- [ Drupal support list | http://lists.drupal.org/ ]
-- [ Drupal support list | http://lists.drupal.org/ ]
-- [ Drupal support list | http://lists.drupal.org/ ]