[ic] Anybody using 4.7?
Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:50:45 -0700
At 05:35 PM 4/21/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Dan B wrote:
>DB>>My crystal ball says that 4.7 is good if you are looking at a 3 month
>DB>>implementation. But are you planning on using the stock foundation
>DB>>template? If so, the foundation template will be very different in 3
>DB>>months than what it is right now. So if you start customizing foundation
>DB>>now, you might want to do so in a way that would allow you to easily
>DB>>your customizations to a potentially updated foundation
>template. E.g., I
>DB>>did it with a context diff of the entire catalog directory when I was
>DB>>working in 4.5.x.
>I'm not sure that this is at all critical.
>As I understand it, a store is nothing more than a bunch of templates
>and ICTags that have been put together in such a way as to create a
>store that is of your liking.
>Since it is nothing more than groups of ICTags and templates, they will
>be supported in all future versions of IC (although this, that, or the
>other tag may be dropped through obsolescence.)
> From what I am seeing, 'Construct Something' should work identically
>under all future releases of IC, although it won't be included in
>I am building my store on modifications to 'Construct Something' in the
>faith that the changes that I am making that are working just fine
>under 4.6.4 will work just as well under 100.10.25
>I see only 2 reasons for upgrading the server once my store is built
>1. There is a new function or ICTag that will make an improvement to my
>store when I implement it.
>2. There is a security issue with my existing server.
Yes, but I wasn't talking about catalog<-->ic compatibility. I was talking
about the foundation catalog itself. My hypothesis was that foundation
itself will have improvements that one might like to take advantage of
between now and 4.7 release.
For example: I started building my catalog in 4.5 somewhere. As part of
building my catalog, I made a lot of customizations to the catalog
files. When 4.6 was released, it had an updated catalog (with new features
such as multiple ship-to's, bugfixes, etc.) that I wanted to take advantage
of. However, I didn't want to re-write all the html customizations that I
had done. That's where a method of forward-porting your own
"customizations" becomes valuable. (Or, back-porting changes to the
template: same effect).
But yes, it is amazing how well compatibility is maintained between ic
Dan Browning, Cyclone Computer Systems, email@example.com