Say hello to release 1.0.5!

[TestTB4Store]

Hi,

What about translations? Anything new regarding translations?

I have made changes in the translations?

Can I remove that folder too from the zip?

[TestTB4Store]

Hi,

What about translations and mails? Anything new regarding translations and mails?

I have made changes in the translations and emails?

Can I remove those folders too from the zip?

[TestTB4Store]

Hi,

I tried and I was able to update to 1.0.5.

But 1.0.5 is a serious failure with regards to full page cache.

Product page shows 500 server error when product is enabled in full page cache.

In other words, 1.0.5 is a COMPLETE MISTAKE. It MUST NOT be released at all.

[piet]

@testtb4store there is a lot of negative vibes in your posts, I wonder why is that?

[Briljander]

@testtb4store I hope your are one of the Patron backers with all those demands

[TestTB4Store]

I m just telling what is happening. People here cannot take the the fact that there are errors in the TB???? To me it is clear that TB 1.0.5 simply screws full page caching even more than 1.0.4 How can you make progress and fixes if you refuse to the wrongs in the TB.

[Briljander]

I think it's great that people (you) report bugs but if you're not backing the project there will be noone fixing the bugs in the end when everything comes around.

[Traumflug]

People here cannot take the the fact that there are errors in the TB???

People can take it. That's why they don't moan about the fact.

Negative words don't help fixing bugs. Helpful is to describe what's going on, as exactly as possible. What worked in 1.0.4, what no longer works in 1.0.5. If you can find the time, do a Developer Installation and see whether it happens there as well. Then you can go through all the commits step by step to find the one which introduced the regression. A strategy named bisecting helps for quicker results.

To my knowledge, there are no changes regarding the full page cache between these two versions, so it's apparently a side effect of some other change.

[TestTB4Store]

What are negative? If it fails the full page cache - it fails. Nothing negative about it. Let me say it LOL - with regards to full page cache 1.0.5 is a complete failure!!! To my understanding, the mission of TB is to offer fast website in place of Prestashop.

Again, 1.0.5 screws full page cache even more than 1.0.4.

[piet]

@testtb4store You've made your point, no need to endlessly repeat your comment. If it doesn't work don't use the full page cache, the bug is reported so it will be fixed when it will be fixed. Thanks for testing and reporting.

[Remigius]

i dont get the Go to the config directory and edit the settings.inc.php file, update your version to 1.0.5. and i mean the last part "update your version to 1.0.5"

[lesley]

Open that file on your server, it contains a hard coded version number. In that file you can change it to 1.0.5 once you have upgraded everything.

[doclucas]

@piet said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

@testtb4store there is a lot of negative vibes in your posts, I wonder why is that?

Maybe because reporting bugs can not have a positive vibe to it? Look at github and see all the bugs that this version has and you will come to the same conclusion that this release should have gone through some additional QC before getting launched. If basic things like full page caching and AJAX add to cart are broken on a vanilla installation, then this must not have been released. period. https://github.com/thirtybees/thirtybees/issues

Some people have the money to back the project with that. Other contribute with bug reports, others with bug reports and fixes etc. etc. Each person does what he can do to contribute and there is no reason to bash someone for saying that, even if it done aggressively. The intentions are (IMHO) good.

I am here for a totally different reason, tho. I am a programmer and an investor and was looking into this promising project in order to invest greatly in it. I am saying promising because I have read the great posts by the founder and was led to believe that this project is going to be managed much better than Prestashop. Seeing buggy releases such as 1.0.5 (the first I ever tried unfortunately) and the very slow development progress, don't make me very hopeful. I realize that it's chicken and egg, you gotta have money to be able to work on the project, but I think that at least for the beginning, some major compromises must be done on the part of the founders to make this a very high quality product to begin with, as nobody is going to invest on an e-commerce system that is very buggy still, while there are so many great, popular alternatives out there. I am still interested in making very nice investments and becoming part of this company, but major changes will have to happen. Contact me if you want to discuss.

[Remigius]

Hi, before i do that is there a way to check that the update was succesfull ?

[the.rampage.rado]

When manually updating the update is always sucessful when you have uploaded the files through FTP. The same with the db queries - if the db admin is green you're fine with that query... ;)

[MockoB]

You are completely right @doclucas! I hope you will decide to stay on the project and participate with your skills, because developers are what the project needs most! With all my respect to all that participate with code, I think the project is going to die really soon without the main person behind it @mdekker The reason for the recent bugs is mainly because the developers currently committing code are not so familiar with the core and make some unintentional errors. And I think it is time for clear statement from @mdekker if he will continue supporting the project, because many are worried even if they don't say it aloud.

[doclucas]

@MockoB Frankly, I am not into one-man-show projects. I have seen many open-source projects go down hill just because of that reason. No offence to anyone specific. Such a project must be a team work (or at least a work of several highly skilled and experienced developers) and properly managed by a serious CEO. It is clear the crowd funding is failing at the moment, thus another approach must be taken or the project will eventually die. I am open for business discussions, if the founders wish to talk. My contact details are registered on the site.

[vincentdenkspel]

@doclucas said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

The intentions are (IMHO) good.

The same goes for the developers. So even if this release should not have been released (i don't have an opinion about it because i have not enough knowledge about coding) there is no need to be aggressive.

[the.rampage.rado]

@mockob said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

You are completely right @doclucas! I hope you will decide to stay on the project and participate with your skills, because developers are what the project needs most! With all my respect to all that participate with code, I think the project is going to die really soon without the main person behind it @mdekker The reason for the recent bugs is mainly because the developers currently committing code are not so familiar with the core and make some unintentional errors. And I think it is time for clear statement from @mdekker if he will continue supporting the project, because many are worried even if they don't say it aloud.

I think he's very busy. He's still contributing in the modules of TB but I can imagine he's busy and thus not so active here and on the main repo.

[lesley]

I wouldn't say the crowd funding is failing, we have met all of the goals in so far as our indiegogo campaigns.

1.0.5 was less stable than expected, but really there are only 2 version specific bugs in it. One is where we have changed a huge part of the software, because the original developers were lazy and wrote it insecure. The other was a front end bug I introduced. Some of the bug reports you see are not 1.0.5 specific, they are just discovered old bugs showing their faces from the core.

[x97wehner]

Keep up the great work @lesley and team. Software bugs are always present is development. As long as they're prioritized and resolved in timely fashion then progress is being made.

[doclucas]

@vincentdenkspel said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

@doclucas said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

The intentions are (IMHO) good.

The same goes for the developers. So even if this release should not have been released (i don't have an opinion about it because i have not enough knowledge about coding) there is no need to be aggressive.

Saying the software shouldn't have been released with such obvious bugs in basic functionality isn't being aggressive, it's the truth, especially for a project that promotes itself as being the project that cleans up PS 1.6 bugs. I have no doubt the developers (and founders) have good intentions, but there is a proper release cycle that a good software should go through before being introduced to the public as a final build. For example, I don't see any kind of beta builds listed or changelog (although I may have missed them, so feel free to point me to the right direction). If there were betas, nightlies etc., these kind of bugs wouldn't be introduced in a final release in the first place. Yes, there are always bugs in every software, but shouldn't be so obvious and basic ones. If it was me, and I care about my project, I'd pull the release, revert to publish the last known stable release, fix the new release and launch it again. That would create much more confidence in the software and the team.

[vincentdenkspel]

@doclucas said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

Saying the software shouldn’t have been released with such obvious bugs in basic functionality isn’t being aggressive,

It's not that it is being said. It's the way how it is said c'est le ton qui fait la musique

[Tomik]

revert to publish the last known stable release,

Prestashop is bugged af, there is no release more stable then TB :)

[doclucas]

@lesley said in Say hello to release 1.0.5!:

I wouldn't say the crowd funding is failing, we have met all of the goals in so far as our indiegogo campaigns.

1.0.5 was less stable than expected, but really there are only 2 version specific bugs in it. One is where we have changed a huge part of the software, because the original developers were lazy and wrote it insecure. The other was a front end bug I introduced. Some of the bug reports you see are not 1.0.5 specific, they are just discovered old bugs showing their faces from the core.

When you say "less stable than expected" and" 2 version specific bugs", could you kindly elaborate? And which front end bug did you introduce? (a bit confused)

Thanks