WordPress 2.0 Released

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."

Comments

Re:MySQL facists!!

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be better if PHP had namespaces, then there wouldn't be a need for pq_* and mysql_* hacked function names.

Apache for Windows support

[ImaLamer]

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

Re:MySQL facists!!

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Why?

[Qbertino]

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?

Re:Why?

[BlueMoss]

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.

Re:MySQL facists!!

[ubernostrum]

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.