Implemented Automatic upgrade / update

Shamil

Well-known member
I think that the forum software should be able to do autonomous updates within a minor series, i.e. 1.0 ->1.0.1 ->1.0.2, however, not for 1.1 or 1.2. Might be useful for bugfixes, etc.

This saves a little time downloading and uploading files.

Security could be ensured by means of simple md5 or whatever to verify integrity of the file downloaded by the system.

What do you guys think?
 
Upvote 57
This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
I see a whole lot of breakage with something like this. A canned script doesn't know if an admin has made changes under the hood to the default directory structure. I'd much rather upload changes myself and apply them to how I've set things up. If a canned script was used, you wouldn't be able to change anything under the hood.

There should be a minimum knowledge requirement before one starts remotely accessing servers and using FTP. Dumbing things down isn't the answer, especially with updates.
 
I see a whole lot of breakage with something like this. A canned script doesn't know if an admin has made changes under the hood to the default directory structure. I'd much rather upload changes myself and apply them to how I've set things up. If a canned script was used, you wouldn't be able to change anything under the hood.

There should be a minimum knowledge requirement before one starts remotely accessing servers and using FTP. Dumbing things down isn't the answer, especially with updates.

No one said anything about using FTP. The script will be able to detect if changes have been made, via a simple md5 comparison. Of course, this can be disabled - but many people would find this useful.
 
Huh? md5 sums are used to verify a download is good. It has absolutely nothing to do with verifying if the underlying directory structure on the server has changed. Read what I wrote again. If someone isn't comfortable with FTP, dumbing down the update process isn't the answer.
 
I honestly would find this useful. If you get the option of viewing/auth the update then this will be invaluable for people who are not great in performing updates whilst on the otherhand, experienced users can easily manually and/or view the update and docs before hand.

If you have that option, then I feel it's a nice feature to have. Heck, if it's working good for wordpress I'm sure it'll work great here. Just my opinion.
 
Huh? md5 sums are used to verify a download is good. It has absolutely nothing to do with verifying if the underlying directory structure on the server has changed. Read what I wrote again. If someone isn't comfortable with FTP, dumbing down the update process isn't the answer.

Re-read, and I see what you mean. Again, the system could be such that you'd need to specify where the stuff is. Since we've got an admin.php, you'll be editing a few more things to make it a bit more secure to your liking.
 
I agree with Shelly. An automatic update would be nice since a lot of times I'm just on my laptop, and being able to update on the go or while I was just running my forum would be a great feature. I am also going to agree that the update process should NOT be automatic, but a one click update very similar to that of wordpress.
 
I agree with Shelly. An automatic update would be nice since a lot of times I'm just on my laptop, and being able to update on the go or while I was just running my forum would be a great feature. I am also going to agree that the update process should NOT be automatic, but a one click update very similar to that of wordpress.

I should have explained what I meant by automatic upgrade: the upgrade itself is automatic, but like in WP, you need to sanction it.
 
This is a feature of WP that really shines; plug ins and themes operate the same way. Pure abstraction of core code and theme/skin/plugin, delightful.
 
Huh? md5 sums are used to verify a download is good. It has absolutely nothing to do with verifying if the underlying directory structure on the server has changed. Read what I wrote again. If someone isn't comfortable with FTP, dumbing down the update process isn't the answer.
He meant that the system could md5 all the current files and compare them against a list of hashes for the previous version to tell if the user modified any of the core source code. It would not that hard to make the update script "smart," in that it detects changes to the underlying directory structure or core files, and will notify the user/throw errors appropriately. :)
 
He meant that the system could md5 all the current files and compare them against a list of hashes for the previous version to tell if the user modified any of the core source code. It would not that hard to make the update script "smart," in that it detects changes to the underlying directory structure or core files, and will notify the user/throw errors appropriately. :)
Yes, that is what I meant.
 
He meant that the system could md5 all the current files and compare them against a list of hashes for the previous version to tell if the user modified any of the core source code. It would not that hard to make the update script "smart," in that it detects changes to the underlying directory structure or core files, and will notify the user/throw errors appropriately. :)

FIMs ! File Integrity Monitoring :P Reminds me of PCI compliancy :eek:...
 
PCI compliancy on Linux must be easier than it is on Windows. Now, File Integrity Monitoring + PHP?
From what I've read full PCI compliance is pretty much impossible under any environment, unless you have a fully dedicated server and can prove that the network, datacenter, etc. is secure. :)
 
From what I've read full PCI compliance is pretty much impossible under any environment, unless you have a fully dedicated server and can prove that the network, datacenter, etc. is secure. :)

We used dedicated servers. It was having DNS, database, web etc. services on separate servers which was the overkilling factor.
 
More control over the commands you can use, and the files and their status.

All WP auto upgrades with SSH2 go through 100% (bench test we did was 150 times)
And 3 out of 10 times the default auto upgrade went wrong (same test, 150 times) (and error reasons varied).

It's therefor a preference, and my suggestion :)
 
Top Bottom