WordPress 2.0 Released

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by Zonk on Saturday December 31, 2005 @11:44AM from the highly-recommended dept.

cyberchucktx writes "Version 2.0 of the Wordpress open source blogging software has now been released." From the post: "In the past if you were linking to a number of posts or pinging a lot of update services, your posting time could appear to slow to a crawl even though everything was instantly done on the backend. We've modified how this works now so posting should be near-instantaneous, like everything else in WordPress."

105 comments

If history really repeats itself by SethD · 2005-12-31 11:49 · Score: 4, Funny

If history is any indication, there will be a 2.0.1 release soon. I can wait ;)
1. Re:If history really repeats itself by drpimp · 2005-12-31 11:52 · Score: 1
  
  What! No Demo? I am not sold on screenshots!
  
  --
  -- Brought to you by Carl's JR
2. Re:If history really repeats itself by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:13 · Score: 0
  
  It's free,
  you can think of it as a full featured demo...
3. Re:If history really repeats itself by ImTheDarkcyde · 2005-12-31 13:13 · Score: 1
  
  well, I installed it today on my site, I'm going to have to say it's a rock-solid release.
4. Re:If history really repeats itself by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 14:27 · Score: 0
  
  If history is any indication, there will be a 2.0.1 release soon. I can wait ;)
  
  That's how I feel about Apache 2.2.0. :-)
5. Re:If history really repeats itself by bsharitt · 2005-12-31 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  Same here, it looks good, and the upgrade went much smoother than the upgrade to 1.5, mostly because it screw up my themes this time.
6. Re:If history really repeats itself by ATinyMouse · 2005-12-31 16:34 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I've been using WordPress 1.5.2 for the last several months to blog about my daughter Bethany who was born in July. I upgraded my daughters blog and my nephews blog to 2.0 last night. I recommend following the upgrade instructions, they list several different times to backup your database and files and not to go any further unless you do. Even though I never had to use the backup, I'm glad I had it. Once the upgrade completed I couldn't browse my blog, but the problem was related to a coding bug with my custom theme. After I fixed it everything has been rock solid.
  
  Some of the biggest changes I've noticed so far is the admin screen using a Google like dragging and dropping interface for placement of window frames. The added WYSIWYG HTML editor is nice, but when I click on the formatting icons in Firefox none of their actions "stick." I'm pretty sure the problem is related to an extension, I just haven't figured out which one yet. They added a theme preview when picking themes instead of the text one they use to have and categories for your posts can be added on the fly. An even more exhaustive list is here.
  
  I've only used it twice to post entries since the upgrade, but I'm really happy with what I've seen so far.
MySQL facists!! by autopr0n · 2005-12-31 11:49 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Why not support for PostgreSQL? How hard can it possibly to write code that supports more then DB? It's unbelievable that almost no blogging software supports a real RDBM.

If you're running a tiny virtual server, you don't want to bother running two RDBM. Bleh.

LONG LIVE POSTGRE!

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
1. Re:MySQL facists!! by shark72 · 2005-12-31 11:53 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  "Why not support for PostgreSQL? How hard can it possibly to write code that supports more then DB? It's unbelievable that almost no blogging software supports a real RDBM."
  
  WordPress is open source. This means that if you like, you can contribute by making the improvements yourself. That's how open source software tends to be improved... each contributor adds the features that they would like to see.
  
  At the very least, you should give it a try. If you're right, and adding PostGRE is the trivial task that you imply, then it should be a snap, and WordPress will be the better for it. If it turns out to be a little too daunting, then you'll have answered your own question of why it hasn't yet been done.
  
  --
  Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
2. Re:MySQL facists!! by vidarlo · 2005-12-31 11:56 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  PHP has database specific functions, mostly. Whilst it is not too hard, it is some work. As it is open source, I suggest that you write your own database functions, and make it work. It's your right to fork it. Really. All web hotels I've came across uses mysql, it is the single most popular db for php-stuff. It's for a reason that LAMP is LAMP, not LAPP ;)
  
  --
  Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
3. Re:MySQL facists!! by rebug · 2005-12-31 11:59 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Yeah, it would be great if PHP had some PostgreSQL functions.
  
  --
  
  there's more than one way to do me.
4. Re:MySQL facists!! by rainman_bc · 2005-12-31 11:59 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Yes, true, but if it's not coded right, it can be a big pain to make it work with anything by mysql.
  
  Creating a database independant application needs to be a consideration from the beginning, not an after thought.
  
  --
  09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
5. Re:MySQL facists!! by drpimp · 2005-12-31 12:00 · Score: 1
  
  I believe that most hosting companies don't support PostgreSQL, but rather support MySQL on average (unless you have your own server). So as it would not be that hard, which they could most certainly add, they probably have just not got around to it. Just my opinion.
  
  Just a side note, MySQL 5 is definately a RBDM
  
  --
  -- Brought to you by Carl's JR
6. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:10 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  It would be better if PHP had namespaces, then there wouldn't be a need for pq_* and mysql_* hacked function names.
7. Re:MySQL facists!! by statusbar · 2005-12-31 12:15 · Score: 1
  
  Does MySQL 5 support transactions AND full text searches on the same tables?
  
  --jeffk++
  
  --
  ipv6 is my vpn
8. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:20 · Score: 0
  
  Exactly. Has the grandparent actually taken a look at the source code for WP? There's absolutely no DB abstraction. It's all coded for MySQL. You want another database? It'll take until at least WP 4 to sort out this mess.
9. Re:MySQL facists!! by soundofthemoon · 2005-12-31 12:23 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  You might want to check out typo, an open source blog developed in Ruby on Rails. From the overview: "Supported databases: Mysql, Sqlite, and PostgreSQL"
10. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:23 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  It's for a reason that LAMP is LAMP, not LAPP ;)
  
  Hahahahaha! I get it. It's because most OS software developers Just Don't Get It when it comes to databases. They read a text file that teaches them "SELECT * FROM SomeTable;" and suddenly they're DBAs, except they're not. Fortunately for them MySQL sucks in such a fashion as to give them a false feeling of confidence that they're shit is going to work. As long as they actually don't do anything mission critical they're fine.
  
  LAMP is LAMP for the same reason people drink wine out of a box, sleep on 100 TC sheets, and run Linux: because they are good enough even though they miss the boat in a number of fundamental ways.
11. Re:MySQL facists!! by vidarlo · 2005-12-31 12:35 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, it would be great if PHP had some PostgreSQL functions.
  Well, as I said... feel free to fork Wordpress, or submit a patch. Noone is denying you that right. And after all, most open source SW is made to fit ones need. Including everything I make. I'm kinda selfish. I make modifications to suit myself, but I share them. Most contributors do open source because it suits them.
  
  --
  Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
12. Re:MySQL facists!! by autopr0n · 2005-12-31 12:36 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If you're right, and adding PostGRE is the trivial task that you imply, then it should be a snap, and WordPress will be the better for it. It's easy to make a system support multiple databases when starting from scratch. It can be more difficult if the code is already written and hacked up with 'mysqlisms'.
  
  --
  autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
13. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:42 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe the reason they went with MySQL is that the Postgres "community" is a bunch of bigots. I don't see a bunch of rabid SQLite/BDB/MSSQL/Oracle fanboys troll every time anything remotely connected to MySQL is posted here. Not the case with Postgres.
14. Re:MySQL facists!! by Elwood+P+Dowd · 2005-12-31 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  Does MySQL 5 support transactions AND full text searches on the same tables?
  We were talking about personal blog software, right?
  
  --
  
  There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
15. Re:MySQL facists!! by Limburgher · 2005-12-31 12:53 · Score: 1
  
  A> Lay off MySQL. It's awesome. As is PostgreSQL.
  B> I recently upgraded the software linked to in my sig to support PostgreSQL in addition to MySQL. Non-trivial, but the afternoon was worth it. Granted, it's a smaller application than Wordpress, but in doing so, I've created a framework I can use in any PHP application, and add support for additional RDBMSs as well. A worthwhile exercise.
  
  --
  You are not the customer.
16. Re:MySQL facists!! by chromatic · 2005-12-31 13:13 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Evidently even personal software deployed on single-user virtual hosts has to be enterprise-ready, scalable, mature, and ready for prime time, or something. I guess.
  
  --
  how to invest, a novice's guide
17. Re:MySQL facists!! by Christopher+Cashell · 2005-12-31 13:41 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, it's too bad PHP doesn't support some sort of database abstraction layer. ;-)
  
  Realistically, if you design an application from the start with even just a little bit of, well. . . design, and consideration for portability and future growth, database independance is not very difficult.
  
  Unfortunately, it's been my experience that most people don't really think beyond the next few hours when they're coding, which means that making things better later on is a huge chore.
  
  --
  Topher
18. Re:MySQL facists!! by ubernostrum · 2005-12-31 14:05 · Score: 1
  
  If you're right, and adding PostGRE is the trivial task that you imply, then it should be a snap, and WordPress will be the better for it. If it turns out to be a little too daunting, then you'll have answered your own question of why it hasn't yet been done.
  
  While I don't know about Wordpress, I'm a fairly active Textpattern user and the reason for the lack of Postgres support in the past was always that Textpattern's search function relies on full-text indexing, something Postgres doesn't quite do natively (it requires either the fulltextindex or tsearch module, neither of which are built by default). There's now a development branch of Textpattern with Postgres support, though. I haven't looked at the code, but it may be that they're working around it somehow.
19. Re:MySQL facists!! by ubernostrum · 2005-12-31 14:09 · Score: 1
  
  You might want to check out typo, an open source blog developed in Ruby on Rails. From the overview: "Supported databases: Mysql, Sqlite, and PostgreSQL"
  
  Typo's a bit of a beast, though, in most shared hosting environments. And there was that nasty memory leak in Rails it exposed a while back...
20. Re:MySQL facists!! by X.25 · 2005-12-31 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  Hahahahaha! I get it. It's because most OS software developers Just Don't Get It when it comes to databases. They read a text file that teaches them "SELECT * FROM SomeTable;" and suddenly they're DBAs, except they're not. Fortunately for them MySQL sucks in such a fashion as to give them a false feeling of confidence that they're shit is going to work. As long as they actually don't do anything mission critical they're fine.
  
  And you must be the ultimate authority on what is "mission critical" for who? I guess you've reviewed all applications on this planet (especially company internal ones) that use MySQL, so you'd know.
  
  Ebay uses some serious "mission critical" database server, yet their site is shit slow most of the time. I guess those "mission critical" database servers are not that good either. I reckon Ebay should move to Postgres - it's silver bullet solution for all database needs. It also cooks and washes dishes.
  
  Everyone uses what suits them best. Some people use Windows, some people use Postgres, some people use MySQL, and some use flat-text files.
  
  I've seen quite few MISSION CRITICAL applications in banks that still use flat-text files. Do you want me to give them your contact details, so that you can "open their eyes"? I'm sure they need your expert advice...
21. Re:MySQL facists!! by ubernostrum · 2005-12-31 14:22 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Realistically, if you design an application from the start with even just a little bit of, well. . . design, and consideration for portability and future growth, database independance is not very difficult.
  
  Unfortunately, it's been my experience that most people don't really think beyond the next few hours when they're coding, which means that making things better later on is a huge chore.
  
  Reiterating a comment I made above, and expanding a little:
  
  Sometimes there is a good design reason for not supporting multiple backends; for example, Textpattern, my personal favorite for blogging/lightweight CMS solutions, has long been MySQL-only, not because of laziness or ignorance, but because Postgres doesn't have fulltext indexing by default (requires either of two contrib modules which don't get built in a standard Postgres install), and Textpattern uses fulltext indexing. There's a development branch of Textpattern which has experimental Postgres support (even though the trunk is MySQL-only, Textpattern does use abstraction in its database interface) which may or may not make that available for the future Textpattern 4.1, but I haven't had a chance to play with it, so I don't know how they're working around that problem.
  
  And while I tend to be fairly DB-agnostic, I can understand that deliberate targeting of MySQL is a good way to keep an application like Wordpress manageable; since MySQL is by far the most common DB available for its target market (shared hosting customers), this pleases the most people while keeping the need to worry about inconsistencies between DBs to a minimum.
22. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 14:29 · Score: 0
  
  It's your right to fork it. Really.
  Contrary to popular belief, the "right to fork it," while proposed in the Declaration of Independence, does not appear in the Constitution. That is why, after nearly 220 years of Constitutional government in the United States, you still have to fight for your right to fork it!
23. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 15:36 · Score: 0
  
  That's because databases like MSSQL and Oracle get respect in their area. Postgres and MySQL occupy the area of free open source databases, yet despite the fact that MySQL is garbage (and no, I'm not a Postgre user, but I do make a living working with relational databases, and MySQL does not qualify) it gets all the press and attention which Postgre is virtually unknown despite the fact that it's probably the only free, open source database that actually gets recommended by real professionals for the same duties are Oracle and DB2.
  
  MySQL is the Internet Explorer of the database world - it's rotten to the core (a flat file selection engine kludged a 1000 times with emulation for SQL and relational concepts) and it only got to where it was through bundling (even making special changes to their licence to maintain the LAMP/WAMP piggy back) and vendor lock in (mysql_).
  
  Oh, and actually there are a lot of "SQLite/BDB/MSSQL/Oracle fanboys" who speak up everytime MySQL is mentioned here - you've just mistaken them for part of the Postgres community because they recommend it as the superior option for an open source database. Even database developers who are devoted
  to something like Oracle can still tell the difference between a reliable industry grade database and a moving trainwreck.
24. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 15:58 · Score: 0
  
  The OP wasn't saying PHP lacks support for PostgreSQL, jsut that there are different functions. This means that you'd need to write some intermediate layer that would direct calls to one or the other that you don't have to write if you're just doing one DB or the other.
25. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 15:59 · Score: 0
  
  But when Ebays 'mission critical' DBs crash they recover gracefully instead of reverting back to a state 2 hours ago when your auction bid didn't exist.
26. Re:MySQL facists!! by WebCrapper · 2005-12-31 21:40 · Score: 1
  
  I hate to reply to this because it looks like a troll, but oh well.
  
  If you like Postgress so well, why don't you add the functionality into Wordpress? I personally don't see the need for the arguement of PostgreSQL vs MySQL because I've honestly never threw anything at MySQL that it couldn't handle. Whats the old addage? If it isn't broke, don't fix it....
  
  Now before everyone jumps on me, I realize that PostgreSQL can make my life much easier in some respects. But c'mon people - if you want it, code it yourself. I've hand coded functionality into Mambo & Wordpress. I've also fixed other peoples problems in both as well. Heck, one time (at band camp...) I hand coded a CMS - that wasn't fun at all, but I couldn't find something that would work the way I wanted.
  
  Stop yelling at the masses that create something for free and do it yourself.
27. Re:MySQL facists!! by bill_mcgonigle · 2006-01-01 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  And there was that nasty memory leak in Rails it exposed a while back...
  
  As I understand it this bug in Rails was fixed and no longer affects Typo - since you bring it up I suspect you know more about it than I do? Please clarify.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
28. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-01 06:27 · Score: 0
  
  A> Lay off MySQL. It's awesome
  
  Most software under the technological control of Oracle corporation is.
  
  Oh sorry. Did I break your concentration?
29. Re:MySQL facists!! by ubernostrum · 2006-01-01 12:15 · Score: 1
  
  As I understand it this bug in Rails was fixed and no longer affects Typo - since you bring it up I suspect you know more about it than I do? Please clarify.
  
  The leak was in Rails 0.14.1, and it was patched in Rails 1.0RC3; a write-up and links to full details are here. Typo was, so far as I know, the only Rails app which ever managed to trigger it. And I'd say that's because, well, Typo's a bit of a beast. But then I don't particularly care for Rails for any sort of content-management; its application orientation means that for "CMS-style" tasks like blogging you have to bring in all sorts of components (like login generators and admin interfaces) which add overhead. If you're going to do content-management with a framework, use something like a href="http://www.djangoproject.com/">Django which is far better suited to that task (where Rails was extracted from a web application -- Basecamp -- Django was extracted from a newspaper site).
30. Re:MySQL facists!! by 1110110001 · 2006-01-02 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  It's not about supporting Postgressql. They should have used an existing DB (access) abstraction. ADOdb is very nice and still fast. Starting with such an abstraction helps supporting a different database. Instead they've written something with all the bells and whistle - there are even benchmark methods in their DB class.
  
  b4n
31. Re:MySQL facists!! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-02 03:22 · Score: 0
  
  I love it when some jacka^h^h^hmysql fanboy comes along and busts out with the whole "why don't you submit a patch?" routine. Gues what einstien, someone already did it. http://sourceforge.net/projects/wordpress-pg/. If you dig a little deeper you'll find that the core wordpress developers pretty much ignored the port and the offers to help bring postgresql support into the main line wordpress code. Still feeling so smug?
Re:Free Porn by tighr · 2005-12-31 12:01 · Score: 1, Redundant

I have been using Wordpress for almost two years, and every version update adds the features that I want to see. Version 2.0 looks like it already has several new features I never even thought of, like updating the control panel to be slicker and faster. These features will only serve to make Wordpress more valuable to my website. I look forward to installing it later. And, as some users have already pointed out, its open source and fully editable. So if you want to include support for your favorite DB, why don't you go out and do just that?
Wordpress is great software by tighr · 2005-12-31 12:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

I have been using Wordpress for almost two years, and every version update adds the features that I want to see. Version 2.0 looks like it already has several new features I never even thought of, like updating the control panel to be slicker and faster. These features will only serve to make Wordpress more valuable to my website. I look forward to installing it later. And, as some users have already pointed out, its open source and fully editable. So if you want to include support for your favorite DB, why don't you go out and do just that? Most webhosts already offer support for MySQL, so I don't see a problem offering this out-of-the-box solution with that backend.
Apache for Windows support by ImaLamer · 2005-12-31 12:13 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sadly, I'm stuck with version 1.0.1 because none of the rest will work when using Apache on Windows.

--
Get your Unix fortune now!
1. Re:Apache for Windows support by chrisgeleven · 2005-12-31 12:28 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Not only are you using an ancient version of WordPress, you are using one that has some serious security issues. You need to invest in making it work.
  
  I have gotten WordPress 1.5 to work on Windows before just fine, even with Apache running in Windows.
  
  Haven't tried it with version 2.0, but that is due to me moving to OS X and not bothering to boot up the Windows laptop to give it a shot...
2. Re:Apache for Windows support by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:37 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Oh dear. You ARE a bit behind the times. Wamp or XAMPP will both run WP just fine.
3. Re:Apache for Windows support by Millenniumman · 2005-12-31 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  I clicked reply to comment on the parents "funny" moderation, and it has now been changed to "interesting". Must have been under a minute since I started reading this article. Wow.
  
  --
  Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
4. Re:Apache for Windows support by adamh · 2005-12-31 12:45 · Score: 1
  
  Wordpress 1.5.2 and 2.0 work fine for me using Apache on windows, so I'm not sure what you're doing wrong.
  Just download XAMPP and wordpress and you'll be up and running within minutes. Not sure what XAMPP would be like as a production system, but it's great for testing.
5. Re:Apache for Windows support by pankkake · 2006-01-01 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Running Windows is a bigger security issue, so why bother ;-) ?
  
  --
  Kill all hipsters.
6. Re:Apache for Windows support by afabbro · 2006-01-01 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  That's such a cheesy way to get tech support. People do that on USENET all the time - step into a *.advocacy group and say "I don't use X because you can't do Y with it." Then you get a bunch of hotheaded replies: "Oh yeah? I enable Z and it works just fine!" or "Read the doc on configuring in Z support before you shoot off your mouth!" and wah-lah, there's their answer.
  
  --
  Advice: on VPS providers
Old news by Mr.+Spontaneous · 2005-12-31 12:15 · Score: 2, Informative

I upgraded to 2.0 when they first released it a few days ago, and am thoroughly impressed with it. Sure, I'd appreciate a spellchecker (fixed with a plugin), but nothing is perfect.

My one gripe with it, though, is it's new rich text editor - TinyMCE. For some reason it refuses to load and throws an error when attempting to do so. I've documented this on my blog.
I worked around this problem by, in the Admin area, going to Users, and deselecting the "Use the visual rich editor when writing" check box.

--
Its all fun and games until someone loses an eye... then its just fun.
Give it a little time ... by marko_ramius · 2005-12-31 12:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

... there are some issues that need to be worked out yet.

My recommendation with all new software releases ... wait until the first point release before deploying to important systems.
1. Re:Give it a little time ... by RobotRunAmok · 2005-12-31 12:28 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  wait until the first point release before deploying to important systems.
  
  It's blogging software. How important can any of the systems be?
2. Re:Give it a little time ... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:41 · Score: 0
  
  This reminds me of the old Datebase called dbaseII. There was no dbaseI the company knew people wanted to have software that was second generation so the company skipped one and made many sells. :)
3. Re:Give it a little time ... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 14:09 · Score: 0
  
  Well.... actually it's very versatile. You can use it for CMS or anything pretty much. In that respect it's not 'just' blogging software. 'just blogging software' is blogger.com or livejournal.com...
  
  I am using it for a content management system for a small music company, and as an interface for an editing company. I prefer it because it's much less bloated than Xoom, for example.
4. Re:Give it a little time ... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 14:43 · Score: 0
  
  Indeed. I'm working on getting Textpattern implemented for my university's athletics department, hoping to deploy this summer.
5. Re:Give it a little time ... by marko_ramius · 2005-12-31 16:26 · Score: 1
  
  > It's blogging software. How important can any of the systems be?
  
  Ask Yahoo. They're using Wordpress to host blogs.
  
  http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting/problogs .php
6. Re:Give it a little time ... by TheCarlMau · 2005-12-31 19:33 · Score: 1
  
  You do realize, of course, that if everybody did this there would be no first point release? Nobody would download the zero point release resulting in no reported bugs. :-)
WordPress Multiuser: by anandpur · 2005-12-31 12:30 · Score: 2, Informative

WordPress MU is multi-user version of the famous WordPress blogging application. It is ideal for people wanting to offer a hosted version of WordPress
http://mu.wordpress.org/
1. Re:WordPress Multiuser: by OmegaGeek · 2005-12-31 13:28 · Score: 1
  
  WPMU is not considered stable yet, although it is in active development. I wouldn't use it for mission-critical projects unless you have the time and skill to put into tweaking it. (James Farmer's edublogs service is a notable example of someone who has invested the time to fine tune things). By the way, if you want a free wordpress blog without worrying about hosting, check out http://wordpress.com/
  
  --
  Even heroes have the right to dream
2. Re:WordPress Multiuser: by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 17:00 · Score: 0
  
  What is http://drupal.com/ ? Is that the same?
RTFA? by eargang · 2005-12-31 12:34 · Score: 4, Informative

Or you could read the F.A.

"Improved Abstraction — We've eliminated almost all direct SQL queries from the code and moved them to functions and classes that make the entire program more consistent."

granted, no clue why they didn't eliminate all direct queries alltogether ("almost?" what you do you mean, "almost"?) but it's a damn good start towards db independence. a basic blog engine shouldn't be using any non-standard SQL calls anyway so support for Postgres should be easy at this point.

emphasis on should, though. The glass is half empty in my world.
1. Re:RTFA? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 18:03 · Score: 0
  
  Shit like this:
  $wpdb->query("UPDATE $wpdb->users SET user_activation_key = '$key' WHERE user_login = '$user_login'");
  will get you every time.
WYSIWYG Editing is finally here by Saint37 · 2005-12-31 12:35 · Score: 1

I had been using the ChenPress plugin for WYSIWIG editing and I found that it had some issues 2.0 solves them. I also like the fact that you can increase the size of the text editing window. In the past when I was writing a post, it seemed that the window was way too small.

http://www.stockmarketgarden.com/
1. Re: WYSIWYG Editing is finally here by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 14:00 · Score: 0
  
  Ummm ... you could increase the size of the editing window in 1.5 too. Maybe even 1.2.
-1, Inaccurate by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 12:38 · Score: 0

WordPress works just fine on Apache for Windows, though you really shouldn't be using Windows at all -- and your host does have a Unix option, so it's all your fault anyway.
LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by autopr0n · 2005-12-31 12:42 · Score: 1, Insightful

Nothing wrong with The L and the A but MySQL+PHP (which run fine on windows and IIS, by the way) is the visual basic of the early 21st century. A shitty, limited system for people who don't really know how to program. These LAMP fascists are just trying to shoehorn everyone into using their crap by making it seem like they're part of some integrated system when really the last two components are cheap 'good enough' hacks for people who don't know what they're doing.

And really, there is zero difference between LAMP and WAMP, I've never had trouble getting open source PHP/MySQL programs to run on windows servers. There's nothing Linux or Apache specific at all.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
1. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by chrisgeleven · 2005-12-31 12:45 · Score: 1
  
  Except Linux/Apache are free.
  
  Which is a major selling point, especially if you have the time to learn how to use them.
2. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by autopr0n · 2005-12-31 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  What I mean is, all of the components of LAMP are interchangeable. Linux/FreeBSD/Solaris/Windows/MacOS, Apache/IIS/Zeus/Tomcat, MySQL/PostgreSQL, and finally PHP which can't be replaced directly, but you can use anyone of many programming languages witch are also free, like ruby on rails, mod_perl, JSP, etc.
  
  --
  autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
3. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 13:22 · Score: 0
  
  Python. That is all.
4. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by Baricom · 2005-12-31 14:06 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing wrong with The L and the A but MySQL+PHP (which run fine on windows and IIS, by the way) is the visual basic of the early 21st century. A shitty, limited system for people who don't really know how to program. These LAMP fascists are just trying to shoehorn everyone into using their crap by making it seem like they're part of some integrated system when really the last two components are cheap 'good enough' hacks for people who don't know what they're doing.
  
  I would argue that these guys have some concept of how to program. A significant portion of their web site runs on AMP.
  
  Some customers of Zend (the company behind PHP) include Deutschen Bank, Lufthansa, EA Games, Disney, and MIT.
  
  Notable users of MySQL include Google, Ticketmaster, Powell's Books, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, CNET, CraigsList, Technorati, Wikipedia, The Weather Channel, Associated Press, BBC, and Continental Airlines. Oh, and Slashdot.
  
  Are you prepared to argue that all of those companies are using "cheap 'good enough' hacks" and "don't know what they're doing?"
5. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by thevoice99 · 2005-12-31 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  FLPR http://www.flpr.org/ FreeBSD, Lighttpd, PostgreSQL, Ruby Now that is what I call a deployment stack.
6. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by WilliamSChips · 2005-12-31 15:06 · Score: 1
  
  Or, in Bush-talk: "You forgot Python!" Except that Python is important. ;)
  
  --
  Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
7. Re:LAMP is the visual basic of the 21st century by NormalVisual · 2005-12-31 17:24 · Score: 1
  
  Some customers of Zend (the company behind PHP) include Deutschen Bank, Lufthansa, EA Games, Disney, and MIT.
  
  The unfortunate souls that have to work with Disney's central reservations system probably would recommend you take Disney off the list if you're trying to be supportive of Zend. :-)
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
I'm going too by autopr0n · 2005-12-31 12:46 · Score: 1

I've been meaning to check out ruby on rails at some point.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
FTFA WTF by jurv!s · 2005-12-31 12:48 · Score: 1

One note: Safari and older versions of Opera, both fantastic browsers, don't yet support everything that's needed to do WYSIWYG, but we fully expect new versions of those browsers will continue to improve their standards support, so it may just be a matter of time.
What's this all about?

--
sigs are for fools and trolls. no signature is *always* appropriate. you should turn them off in your preferences.
1. Re:FTFA WTF by douceur · 2005-12-31 13:06 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  They're referring to the WYSIWYG editor they've introduced for writing entries. I assume it requires support of the designMode attribute. There's a little more here, if you're interested.
2. Re:FTFA WTF by Big+Diluth · 2005-12-31 13:14 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I think that means Safari and older versions of Opera don't support everything that's needed to do WYSIWYG.
  
  I could be wrong though.
3. Re:FTFA WTF by Millenniumman · 2005-12-31 13:22 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure. Safari works fine with wordpress.
  
  --
  Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
4. Re:FTFA WTF by mumkin · 2005-12-31 14:04 · Score: 1
  
  WP 2.0 works just fine with Safari ... WordPress detects that you're using Safari and serves up the old-style editing interface instead of TinyMCE, its WYSIWYG editor. Read more about TinyMCE's Safari incompatibilities (or from their perspective, Safari's TinyMCE incompatibilities) here.
5. Re:FTFA WTF by Kelson · 2006-01-01 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  The rich-text editor for posting requires features that Opera and Safari haven't implemented yet. People using those browsers will have to write their posts using the regular plain-text editor. (IMO, given the code that the rich editor generates, that's not a huge loss...)
  
  Opera 9 preview 1 is able to use the rich editor. I'm not sure what Safari is missing, so I don't know how far away Safari support is. The rich editor WordPress uses is TinyMCE, so you can check out their compatibility chart. Safari 2.0 and Opera 9p1 are both listed as "partially working," though there's no further detail.
Why? by Qbertino · 2005-12-31 14:17 · Score: 2, Interesting

Why is it that WordPress has such a fanbase within the geek croud that it is mentioned every odd week on slashdot and simular forums but such powerfull well-built open source blogging tools like b2evolution or the awesome Pivot never get mentioned - even if they reach a major release? I've mostly heard programmers rave about WordPress but it doesn't appear to me as the cream of oss server side goodies, so what is it all about?

Anybody care to shed some light on this for me?

--
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 14:24 · Score: 0
  
  Because WordPress is "in," it was a b2 fork (if I recall), and Pivot's website is down.
2. Re:Why? by Baricom · 2005-12-31 16:12 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I think WordPress gets coverage on Slashdot because of its popularity - for whatever the reason, there's far, far more people running it than other open source weblog platforms.
  
  As for why it's so popular, I really can't say. I do think part of the reason is the mass exodus from Movable Type when Six Apart changed the licensing model for the 3.0 release. Perhaps the WordPress people saw an opportunity to increase their user base when they heard the news, and shouted to the people. The increase in marketshare provides incentive to write WordPress plugins, because the audience of potential users is greater.
  
  Perhaps the easiest way to figure out the answers to your question is to ask yourself: what makes Pivot so "awesome?"
3. Re:Why? by BlueMoss · 2005-12-31 21:19 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I chose Wordpress 1.5.2 for http://multimediaplex.com/ and the local high school newspaper, http://copperchronicle.org/ because it has a huge user community that creates and refines plug-ins. Their codex wiki is very rich in tips and content, and they don't have the support and community issues that splits the other Content Management Systems into forked versions like Mambo and the PHPNuke variants.
  
  Plus, Wordpress actually justifies type.
  
  --
  There are no absolutes.
4. Re:Why? by Anunnaki · 2006-01-01 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  I for one like it because of its sleak html code it generates as well as the solid coding base it has. Sure, the features are not enough for some people, but it has never tried to be an entire website portal, just a very good blog software. b2evo in my very personal eyes just cant match it - and there is probpaly no other blog soft that can be hooked up that quickly and troublefree. But this is again baed on my personal experience i have (since 0.7 i believe) Its up to you by the way, to /. other blog soft if you think there are better ones ;-)
5. Re:Why? by illustir · 2006-01-01 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  I refuse to learn absolutely anything concerning PHP. I loathe the language but I agreed to help a friend install a blogging solution recently.
  I looked at what's roughly available and saw the general vibe was heading to Wordpress. I got the package, went through the steps and I had it working in no time. The installation is polished, the steps are very user friendly and well thought out and the whole process and interface is totally polished.
  I still loathe PHP (Typo3 anyone?) but Wordpress is the solid example that you can write a decent app in any programming language.
  
  --
  -- Alper
It works. by Poromenos1 · 2005-12-31 15:41 · Score: 2, Informative

2.0 works in windows (on XAMPP), I tried it before moving my blog to it. It's quite nice, I love the "real" preview.

--
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
Use textile. by Poromenos1 · 2005-12-31 15:44 · Score: 1

Use Textile. It's intuitive, simple and quick.

--
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
Open Source and Blogging? by Fizzlewhiff · 2005-12-31 16:02 · Score: 2, Funny

It just doesn't get any better than this. Well maybe New Years Rockin Eve with Ryan Seacrest.

--

'Same speed C but faster'
copy and paste by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-31 17:29 · Score: 0

Did you really need to copy and paste your comments?
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=172 631&cid=14372415
Re:this is old by pembo13 · 2005-12-31 17:56 · Score: 1

Why didn't you submit it to Slashdot?

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
WYSIWYG issue by neofreko · 2005-12-31 18:19 · Score: 1

Funny, I was impressed by the WYSIWYG editor the first time I see it and install its beta on my localhost. Now that I've use it several times on my localhsot, and even tried to mimick the same behaviour by installing tinyMCE plugin for my wp 1.5.x What should you do if you want to tweak the HTML in your editor? Of course, switch to HTML view. And then you'll just edit the HTML rite? Wrong! You have to parse your HTML spaghetti (it's like a long line of HTML code without any line break) yourself, and then locating the point in which you want to edit or insert your own markup. What about "code" formatting? I cannot recall how bad it was, but I prefer the old add-manual-code-tag method. I use that method with geshi, disabled auto tag completion (closing), thus I can get a fancy colorful code markup. Still, with a lil bit deficiency: double quote and single quote are translated into fancy one. Til now, I still use 1.5.x. I'm still looking for more reason to move to 2.x, beside those ajax stuves.
SQLite? by penguin-collective · 2005-12-31 21:17 · Score: 1

Can it use SQLite as a backend? Running MySQL or PostgreSQL is overkill and unwarranted for these kinds of applications.
Mod parent up. by Futurepower(R) · 2005-12-31 22:22 · Score: 1

Well said.
PR Coverage // Alternatives by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-01 03:17 · Score: 0

Just to add some random noise to all this yelling: Serendipity (www.s9y.org) does support SQL layers for pgsql, mysql, mysqli and sqlite. And it has all the features in its 0.9 version that wordpress just gathers in its 2.0 version.

Have a look at the alternatives, WordPress is actually not the only holy cow in the blogging universe.
Large companies hire the WORST programmers by autopr0n · 2006-01-01 07:35 · Score: 1

large, non-technical IT companies have the absolute worst programmers. I'm sure most of those companies have huge archives of VB code too. Really, you make my point.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Mod parent down. by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-02 13:16 · Score: 0

Pure lies; poorly said.