I need some info on how do upgrade from almost all kind of umbraco versions until 4.5.2 and what the core team has as best practice.
If you have an umbraco 4.0.4.2 and want to go to 4.5.2 ( when it is released ) how should i do the upgrade for it to work correctly and with the less steps.
Can i go 4.0.4.2 - > 4.5.2 ( i know the xml schema is different ) is the upgrade script behind the screen going through all steps 4.0.4.2 -> 4.5 -> 4.5.1 -> 4.5.2
Or do i have to do all those upgrade steps my self? ( hope not :-) )
As for 4.0.4.2 to 4.5.2, I believe this can be done directly without having to do 4.5.1 - it's just a patch release Just follow those those same guidelines, everything still applies.
But not sure? :) Just want to know with somethat know the source that it indeed does all the patch steps when upgrading from 4.0.4.2 to let say 4.5.2 or 4.5.3 when that get here. Anyone?
@Slace - nice! How about 3.0 directly to 4.5.x - should that be possible, as it isnt working - dont know if its a decision by core team it should not be possible to do a directly upgrade or its an error.
But there are so many details that are left out of the guides.....
When movinf from 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 the contents of UI.XML need to be preserved (they will not be by default) or things like RSS feed and other tree add-ons will not work. Not really in the guides other than "compare your files". At the same time there are numerous changes that will show differences in the files because (of course) the new files are NEW files with new code. Non developers have no idea what needs to be copied and what is NEW.
The guides do not tell you that global.asax needs to be removed when moving to 4.x The guide do not mention that the masterpages folder needs to be copied over (it is not obvious to everyone). The guides do not mention the need to copy the contents of PACKAGES in the DATA folder when moving from 3.x to 4.x
These are just a few of the poorly documented things I caught after at least 48 hours of frustration during the upgrade process. Some are listed in other docs, the forum or wiki, but finding them takes a long time.
Lastly, most people here advise moving through each release instead of jumping from 4.0 to 4.5. The problem is that the other binaries and their upgrade notes are no longer available.
@Niels - should we create some wiki pages that describes the different upgrade steps here on our - so it is both on code plex and in the wiki here on our?
Two wiki documents regarding upgrading to 4.5, and neither says the same thing, nor do the two combined have the complete steps. It just take so much effort to find what you need. Wouldn't it be so much eaier to point all links to the same complete document instead of multiple similar incomplete documents?
So many items are left ambiguous... We are told to disable URL rewriting when performing an upgrade. Are we to turn it back on AFTER the upgrade? We are told ro "uncomment" the legacy AJAX settings, but they are not commented out to begin with. We are told to pay attention to file permissions, but not reminded what folders should have what permissions, to find that you have to dig through forum posts or reference OLD (no longer available) install guides.
Upgrading from one version to another is a process that can be very easily documented in a step by step form. If the documents were posted in a permanent location with clear titles for each version, they could be updated as needed instead of posting new partion instrictions in forum possts, wiki posts PDF files. This (at a minimum) is as important as the core code itself if this project is to ever gain mainstream acceptance. Who cares about features and bug fixes if they can't get the software upgraded in the first place.
@William - i see you point and think that the upgrade process is also important to document well as all want to be up to date with the newest umbraco install the most easy way. But as you know the umbraco team has all kind of different users with different point of view on the system and yes i thing that often documentation is left behind instead of new features and bug fixes - and umbraco needs to move forward to keep up against all the other cms out there - but lets hope that documentation will be a bigger part of the plan in the future.
I think that is my point, allow me to elaborate :)
For umbraco to "move forward" it has to have a strong userbase. Without well writen documentation and easy to implement upgrades, users will find another CMS that is well documented and easy to implement and upgrade. Bug fixes and features are wonderful, but at the same time each major revision orphans huge portions of code and/or established sites. So the "users" are in essence never on a stable platform and isntead in a constant struggle to upgrade and recode their sites to keep up with each release. If a user decides to hold firm (as I did on 3.0.3) then a year or two passes and upgrading is almost impossible, yet support for the platform is no longer available.
This project is very poorly documented and is growing in size and scope. To the user who has not been along for the ride, or is not well versed in XML, .NET framework, source code and visual studio, it is daunting mess with only the core developers and dedicated coders able to follow and understand what is needed to isntall, upgrade or maintain an umbraco installation. That is contrary to the goal of the CMS being accepted by a large number of people. Is the goal here to build a complicated product that only hardcore .NET gods can use, or is it to build a CMS that web developers can implement on their windows servers?
Software documentation and related files MUST be mainted in an orderly fashion that follow the same convention and can be easily referenced by anybody looking for a specific release and its related installation and upgrade documents. Codeplex is not user friendly and it is not reasonable to think that any end user would have the skills or patience to use it as a resource for installing or maintaining an umbraco installation. Codeplex is a developer tool, not an end user product resource.
We already have talk of umbraco 5 even though we don't have any good documentation for 4.5 yet. One only has to wonder how much is going to change and cause another upgrade struggle. I certainly hope that the development team can take a half step back and try to gain some perspective from the view of end users. I honestly think (know) that if this project were better documented, then there would be more users.
You're right that we need to do something about the upgrade instructions and it's frustrating that we have two different yet incomplete upgrade instructions. We'll look at that. That said, Umbraco is one of the only CMSes which even makes upgrading between versions possible. Even the highly popular Drupal have a principle of *not* providing bw compatibility between major versions.
I also think that the lack of solid documentation/instruction material is a myth. You've been around since v3 where lack of docs was a HUGE issue. Since then we've had over 80 videos produced, have a ton of documentation on the wiki and there's even a book coming on Wrox. We're even starting to see regular tweets and blog post saying that Umbraco was easy to install, had good getting started materials and superb support.
Our two major challenges is:
to make it obvious how to find the documentation. First step started with the in-context sensitive help in v4.5 and for 4.6 we'll be adding some great dashboards to give videos, wikis, forum more visibility
to motivate people with knowledge to contribute. If you have a great knowledge of legacy upgrades and a good idea on what you wished had been there when you started, be a good community citizen and contribute - make the ultimate upgrade instructions. The wiki on Our Umbraco makes it possible.
I am not sure if this is a stupid suggestion or not, but perhaps if we are allowed to add comments to wiki's? That would allow the community to add in extra details that were not considered by the guru's who wrote the original wiki.
For example; The current wiki at http://our.umbraco.org/wiki/install-and-setup/upgrading-an-umbraco-installation says "Copy over all binaries and umbraco system files". To me who is still quite new to umbraco, I think, what are the system files, which files do I copy (chew chew, oh I don't wanna bugger this up)? To know the answer and feel confident one has to know the whole system and this excludes noobies...
The obvious solution is not to be a noobie and go figure it out, but if we could add comments under the wiki, once one noobie has figured it out, other noobies wouldn't have to trawl the forum.
I'm pretty sure that's what they got at php.net anyway. Seems to work well.
Oh, well what do you know...you can :) I should have read Niel's last line better...I see the add a page button :) Next suggestion: Make that button more obvious :)
The wiki style is part of the problem. The 'instructions' are made up of bits and pieces of team and user constributed docs, forum posts and wiki pages instead of being in a single well organized and up to date document, along side similar documents for other versions. Those who are hardcore fans, coders or like tinkering with software, find themselves right at home in such a setup. The folks who have limited time and or just need answers don't care for such setups :)
Well, I agree, it's not ideal. I prefer well organised and thought out document written by one person too, it's just that a wiki is the next best thing, and resources are not infinite.
That is the reality of open source I guess. Nobody wants to pay for documentation or indeed software that doesn't require a whole bunch of tinkering. If people did want to pay for that they'd be over at a commercial cms where one would hope this is done better (as to weather it is, I don't know). It does create a lemon market of sorts, but you just have to deal with it like everyone else :)
However, having said that, I think the Umbraco corp would do well to document thoroughly and well, the common things that 99.9% of people need to know. (Such as how to upgrade), and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation, but I have no idea on their financial situation and weather the coding side would be preferably in community users minds (or indeed weather someone does this already).
Also....bare in mind I am a complete noob tho, so probably best ignore what I say :)
However, having said that, I think the Umbraco corp would do well to document thoroughly and well, the common things that 99.9% of people need to know. (Such as how to upgrade), and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation...
Exactly. This, by any reasonable measure, is as important as the code itself and key to the userbase growing!
@William - Just a counter question - So would you want the umbraco people to get away from developing new features and tools for lets say the next month or 2 to re-/write documentation and wiki articles?
One of the reasons umbraco is such a powerful CMS is because a really good code base and tools from the core team and then the community contributes with all their knowledge and how to use the stuff. I agree and @Niels does so as well to write better and more documentation but the community has to do some of the job - i bet that someone out their has all the knowledge about the update process but maybe hasent had the time to write it, or dont want to and thats really sad. So lets hope someone will do a complete update process wiki page - but until then we have to rely on multiple contributers.
Maybe if you as a ".net noob" - as you describe your self - when you have figured the complete update process, you could write a "Upgrade guide - from the perspective of a .net noob". Yes you would have to use some time to find all the things you need - but then all the next .net noobs can just read your wiki when they want to upgrade - and thats how the great umbraco community works :)
We're working on a updated and thorough upgrade guide, though I doubt that we'll be able to cover all scenarios (3rd party packages, hacks in installation, etc) and we'll only focus on upgrading from v4.0.x to v4.5.x.
John Sheppard wrote: and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation
I'm interested in knowing how you'd finance this (ie. make it suistainable). I have no idea but I'd find it as convenient as you.
However, we have produced over 80 online training videos the past two years designed to cover most of the scenarios you'll encounter when implementing websites. Based on feedback we continue to add videos every month. These are available for a small monthly fee from http://umbraco.tv and are free for all our PRO customers.
John Sheppard wrote: and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation
Niels Hartvig wrote: I'm interested in knowing how you'd finance this (ie. make it suistainable). I have no idea but I'd find it as convenient as you.
Well, I guess that was precisely my point :) If one wants such things you go to a commercial CMS and pay them. Other than that a community wiki is the next best thing.
As for how to fund it if you wanted to take that route, I have no answers either. I can say that I think the subscription and tv documentation model is a good one. Perhaps that could be extended (price raised) to include textual documentation. That would be a major inconvenience to those who don't wish to pay for a higher priced subscription and I could see it as a barrier for some people to enter. You guys are closer to the market than I and also have the numbers so I am guessing would have already done the sums that probably didn't work out.
From my own personal perspective, I would pay a higher subscription fee for such facilities as I think the ROI is worth it. I could easily envisage that many developers would not fit into that same category however.
Anyway, my point was not to complain, I hope I did not come across that way, because that was not my intention.
@Andres - If that is what it takes, then yes. The goal of the project is to grow and gain acceptance so that it can justify further growth. Well authored and maintained documentation is a critical part of that process, no matter how good the underlying code is. The issue will not resolve itself and instead will grow as the codebase, features and platform support grows.
The community is never going to be able to produce well organized and mainted documentation, thousands of open source "wiki" type projects prove as much. The community can certainly help, but there are two major hurdles that the usebase will never overcome.
Much of the CORE knowledge MUST come from those who write the code. (for example, specific upgrade procedures for each release). This is an area that is a sore spot with a lot of people.
In any open framework, the userbase does not do a good job of proofreading, organizing and defragmenting information. There needs to be a person or people that actively maintain the information and edit into a format and framework that allows the userbase to easily find and access it. The disorganized and fragmented structure of a wiki, forum and video archive are not well suited to the task.
Sadly, adding another wiki page called "an upgrade guide from a .net noob" is not going to fix the core issue. It will be yet one more fragment of information that has to be searched for and vetted by the end user. The "community" is wonderful for expanding the knowledge and sharing advanced information. It does not serve well (at all) as the framework for the core documentation, files or knowledge.
While the work of the team members and contributors is wonderful, and the "cummunity" is full of very kind and helpfull people, not all of us enjoy having to spend time digging through a "community" to compile answers that should (honestly) be part of the base [easy to find and well authored] documentation.
I love the umbraco CMS and fully respect the time, effort and talent that has gone into the project since day one. I just feel that a different approach needs to be considered when it comes to some of the documentation and they way it is organized.
While I have watched a few of the videos (before they were sbuscription based) and feel they are well done, I think the lack of thorough paper (PDF) documentation organized in a well though out framework is still a major drawback. I for one would not mind paying a nominal "support" subscription to have access to up-to-date and complete docs (and an organized file system) that cover step-by-step upgrades and similar core information along side each binary.
You have PRO users, why not consider adding a second tier of user that can access an organized support structure that has the step by step guidies, complete binaries and similar "premium" content. Maybe up the umbraco.tv fee a bit and add the content? The increased premium and lure of complte docs could help to pay for a better documentation process all around?
Upgrade procedure - best practice
Hi all,
I need some info on how do upgrade from almost all kind of umbraco versions until 4.5.2 and what the core team has as best practice.
If you have an umbraco 4.0.4.2 and want to go to 4.5.2 ( when it is released ) how should i do the upgrade for it to work correctly and with the less steps.
Can i go 4.0.4.2 - > 4.5.2 ( i know the xml schema is different ) is the upgrade script behind the screen going through all steps 4.0.4.2 -> 4.5 -> 4.5.1 -> 4.5.2
Or do i have to do all those upgrade steps my self? ( hope not :-) )
Hi Anders,
This should answer all your questions: http://www.karlkopp.com/blog/2010/7/27/upgrading-umbraco-40x-to-45x
@Bijesh Thanks! Looks good - should we make this a wiki page so people can find it on this website.
But what about 4.5.1 and 4.5.1 can you go from 4.0.4.2 to 4.5.2 directly?
There is s wiki page already for an upgrade process http://our.umbraco.org/wiki/install-and-setup/upgrading-an-umbraco-installation
As for 4.0.4.2 to 4.5.2, I believe this can be done directly without having to do 4.5.1 - it's just a patch release Just follow those those same guidelines, everything still applies.
But not sure? :) Just want to know with somethat know the source that it indeed does all the patch steps when upgrading from 4.0.4.2 to let say 4.5.2 or 4.5.3 when that get here. Anyone?
You can go from 4.0.x to 4.5.x no problems.
@Slace - nice! How about 3.0 directly to 4.5.x - should that be possible, as it isnt working - dont know if its a decision by core team it should not be possible to do a directly upgrade or its an error.
No, to upgrade between major versions you should go 3.x -> 4.0 -> 4.5 to be 100% sure
@Niels - thanks for info
But there are so many details that are left out of the guides.....
When movinf from 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 the contents of UI.XML need to be preserved (they will not be by default) or things like RSS feed and other tree add-ons will not work. Not really in the guides other than "compare your files". At the same time there are numerous changes that will show differences in the files because (of course) the new files are NEW files with new code. Non developers have no idea what needs to be copied and what is NEW.
The guides do not tell you that global.asax needs to be removed when moving to 4.x
The guide do not mention that the masterpages folder needs to be copied over (it is not obvious to everyone).
The guides do not mention the need to copy the contents of PACKAGES in the DATA folder when moving from 3.x to 4.x
These are just a few of the poorly documented things I caught after at least 48 hours of frustration during the upgrade process. Some are listed in other docs, the forum or wiki, but finding them takes a long time.
Lastly, most people here advise moving through each release instead of jumping from 4.0 to 4.5. The problem is that the other binaries and their upgrade notes are no longer available.
@William - thanks for your info!
@Niels - should we create some wiki pages that describes the different upgrade steps here on our - so it is both on code plex and in the wiki here on our?
Beating the dead horse...
But a perfect example is here:
http://our.umbraco.org/wiki/about/roadmap/umbraco-45/upgrading-to-umbraco-45 (linked from the roadmap)
http://our.umbraco.org/wiki/install-and-setup/upgrading-an-umbraco-installation (linked from the source download)
Two wiki documents regarding upgrading to 4.5, and neither says the same thing, nor do the two combined have the complete steps. It just take so much effort to find what you need. Wouldn't it be so much eaier to point all links to the same complete document instead of multiple similar incomplete documents?
So many items are left ambiguous... We are told to disable URL rewriting when performing an upgrade. Are we to turn it back on AFTER the upgrade? We are told ro "uncomment" the legacy AJAX settings, but they are not commented out to begin with. We are told to pay attention to file permissions, but not reminded what folders should have what permissions, to find that you have to dig through forum posts or reference OLD (no longer available) install guides.
Upgrading from one version to another is a process that can be very easily documented in a step by step form. If the documents were posted in a permanent location with clear titles for each version, they could be updated as needed instead of posting new partion instrictions in forum possts, wiki posts PDF files. This (at a minimum) is as important as the core code itself if this project is to ever gain mainstream acceptance. Who cares about features and bug fixes if they can't get the software upgraded in the first place.
@William - i see you point and think that the upgrade process is also important to document well as all want to be up to date with the newest umbraco install the most easy way. But as you know the umbraco team has all kind of different users with different point of view on the system and yes i thing that often documentation is left behind instead of new features and bug fixes - and umbraco needs to move forward to keep up against all the other cms out there - but lets hope that documentation will be a bigger part of the plan in the future.
I think that is my point, allow me to elaborate :)
For umbraco to "move forward" it has to have a strong userbase. Without well writen documentation and easy to implement upgrades, users will find another CMS that is well documented and easy to implement and upgrade. Bug fixes and features are wonderful, but at the same time each major revision orphans huge portions of code and/or established sites. So the "users" are in essence never on a stable platform and isntead in a constant struggle to upgrade and recode their sites to keep up with each release. If a user decides to hold firm (as I did on 3.0.3) then a year or two passes and upgrading is almost impossible, yet support for the platform is no longer available.
This project is very poorly documented and is growing in size and scope. To the user who has not been along for the ride, or is not well versed in XML, .NET framework, source code and visual studio, it is daunting mess with only the core developers and dedicated coders able to follow and understand what is needed to isntall, upgrade or maintain an umbraco installation. That is contrary to the goal of the CMS being accepted by a large number of people. Is the goal here to build a complicated product that only hardcore .NET gods can use, or is it to build a CMS that web developers can implement on their windows servers?
Software documentation and related files MUST be mainted in an orderly fashion that follow the same convention and can be easily referenced by anybody looking for a specific release and its related installation and upgrade documents. Codeplex is not user friendly and it is not reasonable to think that any end user would have the skills or patience to use it as a resource for installing or maintaining an umbraco installation. Codeplex is a developer tool, not an end user product resource.
We already have talk of umbraco 5 even though we don't have any good documentation for 4.5 yet. One only has to wonder how much is going to change and cause another upgrade struggle. I certainly hope that the development team can take a half step back and try to gain some perspective from the view of end users. I honestly think (know) that if this project were better documented, then there would be more users.
You're right that we need to do something about the upgrade instructions and it's frustrating that we have two different yet incomplete upgrade instructions. We'll look at that. That said, Umbraco is one of the only CMSes which even makes upgrading between versions possible. Even the highly popular Drupal have a principle of *not* providing bw compatibility between major versions.
I also think that the lack of solid documentation/instruction material is a myth. You've been around since v3 where lack of docs was a HUGE issue. Since then we've had over 80 videos produced, have a ton of documentation on the wiki and there's even a book coming on Wrox. We're even starting to see regular tweets and blog post saying that Umbraco was easy to install, had good getting started materials and superb support.
Our two major challenges is:
Hello there,
I am not sure if this is a stupid suggestion or not, but perhaps if we are allowed to add comments to wiki's? That would allow the community to add in extra details that were not considered by the guru's who wrote the original wiki.
For example; The current wiki at http://our.umbraco.org/wiki/install-and-setup/upgrading-an-umbraco-installation says "Copy over all binaries and umbraco system files". To me who is still quite new to umbraco, I think, what are the system files, which files do I copy (chew chew, oh I don't wanna bugger this up)? To know the answer and feel confident one has to know the whole system and this excludes noobies...
The obvious solution is not to be a noobie and go figure it out, but if we could add comments under the wiki, once one noobie has figured it out, other noobies wouldn't have to trawl the forum.
I'm pretty sure that's what they got at php.net anyway. Seems to work well.
Anyway, just a thought.
Thank you
Oh, well what do you know...you can :) I should have read Niel's last line better...I see the add a page button :) Next suggestion: Make that button more obvious :)
John,
The wiki style is part of the problem. The 'instructions' are made up of bits and pieces of team and user constributed docs, forum posts and wiki pages instead of being in a single well organized and up to date document, along side similar documents for other versions. Those who are hardcore fans, coders or like tinkering with software, find themselves right at home in such a setup. The folks who have limited time and or just need answers don't care for such setups :)
Hi William,
Well, I agree, it's not ideal. I prefer well organised and thought out document written by one person too, it's just that a wiki is the next best thing, and resources are not infinite.
That is the reality of open source I guess. Nobody wants to pay for documentation or indeed software that doesn't require a whole bunch of tinkering. If people did want to pay for that they'd be over at a commercial cms where one would hope this is done better (as to weather it is, I don't know). It does create a lemon market of sorts, but you just have to deal with it like everyone else :)
However, having said that, I think the Umbraco corp would do well to document thoroughly and well, the common things that 99.9% of people need to know. (Such as how to upgrade), and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation, but I have no idea on their financial situation and weather the coding side would be preferably in community users minds (or indeed weather someone does this already).
Also....bare in mind I am a complete noob tho, so probably best ignore what I say :)
However, having said that, I think the Umbraco corp would do well to document thoroughly and well, the common things that 99.9% of people need to know. (Such as how to upgrade), and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation...
Exactly. This, by any reasonable measure, is as important as the code itself and key to the userbase growing!
@William - Just a counter question - So would you want the umbraco people to get away from developing new features and tools for lets say the next month or 2 to re-/write documentation and wiki articles?
One of the reasons umbraco is such a powerful CMS is because a really good code base and tools from the core team and then the community contributes with all their knowledge and how to use the stuff. I agree and @Niels does so as well to write better and more documentation but the community has to do some of the job - i bet that someone out their has all the knowledge about the update process but maybe hasent had the time to write it, or dont want to and thats really sad. So lets hope someone will do a complete update process wiki page - but until then we have to rely on multiple contributers.
Maybe if you as a ".net noob" - as you describe your self - when you have figured the complete update process, you could write a "Upgrade guide - from the perspective of a .net noob". Yes you would have to use some time to find all the things you need - but then all the next .net noobs can just read your wiki when they want to upgrade - and thats how the great umbraco community works :)
We're working on a updated and thorough upgrade guide, though I doubt that we'll be able to cover all scenarios (3rd party packages, hacks in installation, etc) and we'll only focus on upgrading from v4.0.x to v4.5.x.
John Sheppard wrote:
and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation
I'm interested in knowing how you'd finance this (ie. make it suistainable). I have no idea but I'd find it as convenient as you.
However, we have produced over 80 online training videos the past two years designed to cover most of the scenarios you'll encounter when implementing websites. Based on feedback we continue to add videos every month. These are available for a small monthly fee from http://umbraco.tv and are free for all our PRO customers.
John Sheppard wrote:
and preferably have a full time wiki cleaner/collator that maintains and collates community contribs into great documentation
Niels Hartvig wrote:
I'm interested in knowing how you'd finance this (ie. make it suistainable). I have no idea but I'd find it as convenient as you.
Well, I guess that was precisely my point :) If one wants such things you go to a commercial CMS and pay them. Other than that a community wiki is the next best thing.
As for how to fund it if you wanted to take that route, I have no answers either. I can say that I think the subscription and tv documentation model is a good one. Perhaps that could be extended (price raised) to include textual documentation. That would be a major inconvenience to those who don't wish to pay for a higher priced subscription and I could see it as a barrier for some people to enter. You guys are closer to the market than I and also have the numbers so I am guessing would have already done the sums that probably didn't work out.
From my own personal perspective, I would pay a higher subscription fee for such facilities as I think the ROI is worth it. I could easily envisage that many developers would not fit into that same category however.
Anyway, my point was not to complain, I hope I did not come across that way, because that was not my intention.
@Andres - If that is what it takes, then yes. The goal of the project is to grow and gain acceptance so that it can justify further growth. Well authored and maintained documentation is a critical part of that process, no matter how good the underlying code is. The issue will not resolve itself and instead will grow as the codebase, features and platform support grows.
The community is never going to be able to produce well organized and mainted documentation, thousands of open source "wiki" type projects prove as much. The community can certainly help, but there are two major hurdles that the usebase will never overcome.
Sadly, adding another wiki page called "an upgrade guide from a .net noob" is not going to fix the core issue. It will be yet one more fragment of information that has to be searched for and vetted by the end user. The "community" is wonderful for expanding the knowledge and sharing advanced information. It does not serve well (at all) as the framework for the core documentation, files or knowledge.
While the work of the team members and contributors is wonderful, and the "cummunity" is full of very kind and helpfull people, not all of us enjoy having to spend time digging through a "community" to compile answers that should (honestly) be part of the base [easy to find and well authored] documentation.
I love the umbraco CMS and fully respect the time, effort and talent that has gone into the project since day one. I just feel that a different approach needs to be considered when it comes to some of the documentation and they way it is organized.
@Niels
While I have watched a few of the videos (before they were sbuscription based) and feel they are well done, I think the lack of thorough paper (PDF) documentation organized in a well though out framework is still a major drawback. I for one would not mind paying a nominal "support" subscription to have access to up-to-date and complete docs (and an organized file system) that cover step-by-step upgrades and similar core information along side each binary.
You have PRO users, why not consider adding a second tier of user that can access an organized support structure that has the step by step guidies, complete binaries and similar "premium" content. Maybe up the umbraco.tv fee a bit and add the content? The increased premium and lure of complte docs could help to pay for a better documentation process all around?
Hi All,
I am new to Umbraco. And i want to upgared the our running Umbraco site that is in 3.0.5 to 4.71.
Any help ..
Thanks in Advance.
Hi All,
I have upgrade it successfully.
Now, i am going to install it with new version.
The process not go ahead after 20% installation of database.
It not displaying any error, or not go ahead.
Is that any minor mistake in Upgradation ???
Please, help me.
Thanks in Advance,
Hemant.
is working on a reply...