Recommended procedure to upgrade to latest version?

Nov 16, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Hi there,

Going from Squiggle 3.1, Dec 18, 2011, to the latest release, Squiggle 3.2,Oct 14, 2012 and there does not seem to be compatibility between the two OR a way to upgrade preserving info.

Copying and pasting the new release into the old ones directory, overwriting any files, does not work at preserving history and settings...

Also, is it normal that 3.1 clients CANNOT see 3.2 clients...making it necessary for ALL to upgrade at the same time?

 

Any recommended tips for upgrading properly, ideally history and settings?

Coordinator
Nov 16, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Hi

Squiggle 3.1 and 3.2 are not compatible so it is normal that their clients can not see each other.
You will have to update all the clients at once. 

Also it is true the settings and the history will be lost. 
In principle it is possible to migrate the history database manually by writing sql script and it is also possible to write a powershell script or a program to copy settings from 3.1 and transform them into 3.2 file for each client. It will of course require coding effort on your part.

Nov 16, 2012 at 3:30 PM
Edited Nov 16, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Good day!

Well, for starters, thank you for your quick response! Much appreciated!

I will just offer some comment...because Squiggle 3.1 actively checks for new version (like many programs do) and advertises that a new version is out (even though it is Beta, it is "probably ready") above your contacts...this implies that each user will upgrade as they see fit, in fact, it encourages them to do so...

Given that the above is true, do you not agree that it is somewhat misleading to advertise these upgrades? Especially if by doing so they would:

1) lose all settings and history

2) lose connectivity with the rest of the Squiggle users, permanently, until they upgrade as well

3) no mention is made of these facts when downloading/unpacking the new version. In fact, the method you use to version your application (3.1 to 3.2 beta), really seems to imply compatibility. If it was designed from the ground up to be incompatible with older versions, wouldn't it be more reasonable to give it a 4.0 designation?

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to be negative; rather, my intention is to offer feedback to the developer of this excellent application. If you were to create an installer that migrated settings, history and such, as well as inform the user that by upgrading, they will lose access to older versions, you would make this application much more digestible for the masses.

Unless it is your intention to remain a "niche" application, built only for those with the ability to code solutions to these things, I believe this is not an unreasonable request/suggestion.

Again, thank you for your hard work, and for making it open source!