I expect we’ll see a lot of questions generated by the coming release of CI 3.0
Does it make sense to create new forums here which are specific to the new version?
I suggest this based on the need to know which version is being used when responding to questions.
Posters generally don’t state versions until asked, which takes up a couple of thread cycles…
Your thoughts?

I always thought so.  Along with a mini changelog in the user guide next to each function telling what version it was introduced in and also any changes made.  [moderated] user comments in the user guide as well.  Much like php.net does in their docs.

@Cronix I very much like the moderated comments on php.net. 
I don’t know if that will be a feature with the new User Guide, but it gets my vote.

That would be a very welcome addition!

The user guide is being transformed from plain (hand-written) HTML to Sphinx, but AFAIK that doesn’t give us the possibility to include user comments in it.

Every new CodeIgniter version is the only version supported and I’m still surprised when I see somebody reporting a problem with a 1.7.x version - that is WAY out of date. The answer to every such question should be only one and it’s quite simple: upgrade.

Every time I see someone say, “just upgrade” I think: Here’s someone who has very little real-world experience.

It depends on the version and the changes made. Minor revisions are as easy as replacing the system folder and you’re done. Major revisions usually include major beneficial changes, and should be upgraded within a reasonable amount of time (in my opinion).

jmadsen - 09 November 2012 05:14 AM

Every time I see someone say, “just upgrade” I think: Here’s someone who has very little real-world experience.

Ihmo there’s a difference between still using an old version in production, and a “supplier” supporting that old version.

You might also have a copy of Windows 95 running somewhere, do you expect Microsoft to still support that?

Apparently, there’s somebody in every forum thread assuming that I’m the newbie fan around.

WanWizard - 09 November 2012 08:14 AM

jmadsen - 09 November 2012 05:14 AM

Every time I see someone say, “just upgrade” I think: Here’s someone who has very little real-world experience.

Ihmo there’s a difference between still using an old version in production, and a “supplier” supporting that old version.

You might also have a copy of Windows 95 running somewhere, do you expect Microsoft to still support that?

WanWizard got the key part though - an old CodeIgniter version means an unsupported version. I’ll just quote Phil Sturgeon to make it clearer:

...
Compare that to CodeIgniter which can be upgraded from 1.7.0 to 3.0 in about an hour.

A great percentage of threads are created in the wrong forum category, and I doubt that adding another for CI 3.0 will cause less confusion. Since there is no real forum moderation here, it would be smart to start there first.

WanWizard - 09 November 2012 08:14 AM

jmadsen - 09 November 2012 05:14 AM

Every time I see someone say, “just upgrade” I think: Here’s someone who has very little real-world experience.

Ihmo there’s a difference between still using an old version in production, and a “supplier” supporting that old version.

You might also have a copy of Windows 95 running somewhere, do you expect Microsoft to still support that?

I wasn’t saying they should continue to support old versions; I just meant people shouldn’t so flippantly answer “just upgrade”.

Upgrading software can often involve a lot more than just doing the actual software upgrade. There are places where trying to upgrade any particular piece of software in the system involves a mountain of planning, impact studies, testing “bureaucracy”. Yes, it may be the fault of the company’s structure, and yes, they had warning and should have planned the upgrade in time, but that isn’t going to change in time to fix the issue you are having today.

You need to think past “everyone is in a small dev shop just like me”. You can certainly mention that an upgrade will solve issue X, and you can even answer, “Sorry, we no longer support that version”, but we don’t need the eye-rolling & “My God - you’re still on THAT version??” that too many people give when you aren’t on the latest version of something.

(let’s not forget: the FORUMS support whatever version the person asking about is on. I still help a customer who is on 1.7.3, and if I run into something strange, I will come here to see if anyone remembers. likewise, I will try to help in the reverse situation )

TWP Marketing - 08 November 2012 05:12 PM

I expect we’ll see a lot of questions generated by the coming release of CI 3.0
Does it make sense to create new forums here which are specific to the new version?
I suggest this based on the need to know which version is being used when responding to questions.
Posters generally don’t state versions until asked, which takes up a couple of thread cycles…
Your thoughts?

Gave this a little thought, and I think this would be good IF:

1) as skunkbad said, we could get a team of volunteer moderators to manage. I don’t know much about CI internal politics, but I don’t know why we can have a team of volunteer devs entrusted with the codebase, and can’t have a team with the power to delete spam & move posts to the appropriate topic

2) Rename/Reword the topics: yes, I know a certain pct just don’t bother to get it right, but I think the descriptions of each area are far more confusing then they have to be. Think of some of these posters who can hardly put together enough English to ask their question, then go read the differences between “Code” and “Bugs” and “Ignited code” again. KISS

3) Let’s remember that the whole point of this is to try to help the people ANSWERING the questions - who don’t want to have to volunteer all that extra time figuring out the poster’s environment. Help desks use forms to collect that info, and we should see if we can replicate parts of that idea