swguy 27 Posted August 3 What's the reasoning behind this decision? Because it sure did create a lot of work for people who are trying to keep their mods current. Contributions: Better Together and Quantity Discounts for osCommerce 2.3.x and Phoenix. See my profile for more details. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burt 3,851 Posted August 3 (edited) To allow the ethos of "no core code changes". Already covered in depth, multiple times, over the years - there's some threads you can read more buried in the forum. Note also that FILENAME_* are gone too... Edited August 3 by burt This is a signature that appears on all my posts. IF YOU MAKE A POST REQUESTING HELP...please state the exact version of osCommerce that you are using. THANKS Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
♥BrockleyJohn 238 Posted August 3 It's part of an overall strategy to make addons easier to install for shopowners, preferably without changing any code at all. It's better that addon publishers do the work instead of all the shopowners installing the addon each doing some (and having problems) For a new install or if your store isn't mobile-friendly, get the community-supported responsive osCommerce (Phoenix). here: on the official osc download page Working on generalising bespoke solutions for Quickbooks integration, Easify integration and pay4later (DEKO) integration at 2.3.x Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swguy 27 Posted August 3 11 minutes ago, burt said: Already covered in depth, multiple times, over the years Can you point me to a specific post? I'm genuinely curious. I'm talking about defines for core tables in osCommerce like TABLE_CONFIGURATION. Also, doesn't this kill the use of prefixes? Contributions: Better Together and Quantity Discounts for osCommerce 2.3.x and Phoenix. See my profile for more details. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burt 3,851 Posted August 3 Just now, swguy said: Can you point me to a specific post? I'm genuinely curious. I'm talking about defines for core tables in osCommerce like TABLE_CONFIGURATION. Also, doesn't this kill the use of prefixes? You'd need to search for them, they date back to 2014 or earlier. Who cares about pre-fixes? Databases are cheap. This is a signature that appears on all my posts. IF YOU MAKE A POST REQUESTING HELP...please state the exact version of osCommerce that you are using. THANKS Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swguy 27 Posted August 3 4 minutes ago, burt said: Who cares about pre-fixes? Databases are cheap. I definitely wouldn't support prefixes if I was starting a project today, but what if someone is upgrading an osCommerce 2.3 installation with prefixes? Do they have to rename all their tables? Contributions: Better Together and Quantity Discounts for osCommerce 2.3.x and Phoenix. See my profile for more details. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burt 3,851 Posted August 3 Just now, swguy said: I definitely wouldn't support prefixes if I was starting a project today, but what if someone is upgrading an osCommerce 2.3 installation with prefixes? Do they have to rename all their tables? Yes. That'd take...a minute or two ? In this instance...who runs osCommerce with prefixes? 1 in 1000 shopowners? I get what you're saying, but to do positive things...sometimes means a perceived negative thing has to be lived with. I did actually have a branch with full pre-fixing capability - but there was very little interest in it, so it got deleted. This is a signature that appears on all my posts. IF YOU MAKE A POST REQUESTING HELP...please state the exact version of osCommerce that you are using. THANKS Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
♥Stephan Gebbers 45 Posted August 3 Quote Yes. That'd take...a minute or two ? in an ideal world, yes. in reality, just require the old files (filenames.php / database _tables.php) into application_top.php,where they previously were, to keep older addons using defines running. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burt 3,851 Posted August 3 45 minutes ago, Stephan Gebbers said: in reality, just require the old files (filenames.php / database _tables.php) into application_top.php,where they previously were, to keep older addons using defines running. Avoid core code changes...you could instead use a Hook... Try it in Phoenix with one of the pre-placed sitewide hooks This is a signature that appears on all my posts. IF YOU MAKE A POST REQUESTING HELP...please state the exact version of osCommerce that you are using. THANKS Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swguy 27 Posted August 3 Burt, you have done a Yeoman's job of taking care of osCommerce. Way better than I could have done. But this decision seems unwise. You have completely broken all existing mods, even ones that didn't modify includes/database_tables.php. And the file still exists in the admin folder! If you really wanted to get rid of the file, why didn't you just put these defines in the configuration table so existing mods would continue to work? Shouldn't there have been a pinned thread somewhere saying, "Hey, modders, update your stuff!" so I wouldn't have to learn about this from a bug report? Contributions: Better Together and Quantity Discounts for osCommerce 2.3.x and Phoenix. See my profile for more details. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burt 3,851 Posted August 3 Cheers. wasn't my decision decision was made in 2014 or maybe earlier - 5 *years* ago at least - I know I was on my holidays when the first argument about it got out of hand announcement was made years ago in forum work has been ongoing ever since to get osc updated, work has not yet started in admin area hardly - waiting on more shopowners, developers, conultants and businesses to actively support forward movement. <blunt>addon compatibility, that's up to addon makers</blunt> Maybe your focus is elsewhere - which is 110% cool - hence why you haven't come across this in the past 5 years ? This is a signature that appears on all my posts. IF YOU MAKE A POST REQUESTING HELP...please state the exact version of osCommerce that you are using. THANKS Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swguy 27 Posted August 3 I apologize, I thought you were the one championing it. Oh well, I guess I had better get on board if this is the new direction. I'd love to be more involved in osCommerce, but the demand from paying clients just isn't there. Who knows, maybe Phoenix will breathe new life into the project. Contributions: Better Together and Quantity Discounts for osCommerce 2.3.x and Phoenix. See my profile for more details. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burt 3,851 Posted August 3 2 minutes ago, swguy said: maybe Phoenix will breathe new life into the project Things do generally seem more positive since the release of Phoenix. It's solved some of the points that some people liked to regularly quibble about; lack of "official" acceptance lack of versioning ease of updating Joined the Phoenix Club? This is a signature that appears on all my posts. IF YOU MAKE A POST REQUESTING HELP...please state the exact version of osCommerce that you are using. THANKS Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swguy 27 Posted August 3 Is there guidance on updating from 2.3? Contributions: Better Together and Quantity Discounts for osCommerce 2.3.x and Phoenix. See my profile for more details. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
♥Stephan Gebbers 45 Posted August 3 7 hours ago, burt said: Avoid core code changes...you could instead use a Hook... Try it in Phoenix with one of the pre-placed sitewide hooks ok, you are right, sitewide hooks is a new option to add things like that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites