Requirements page

[bolverk]

PhpBB4/Requirements
From phpBB Development Wiki
< PhpBB4
Jump to: navigation , search
Software Requirements

These requirements will have to be met by the server that shall run phpBB4.

* PHP >= 5.3.0 thus SPL is always available.

I think you should restructure that page and also rename it to Dependencies & System Requirements this will allow for not only a listing of the applications needed to support phpbb but also allow you to define a minimum baseline as far as system environment variables which you currently do not provide. What I mean by environment variables is a baseline of the minimum system requirements for phpBB to execute, things like PHP memory limit, execution times etc, along with any module dependencies. One of my biggest pet peeves with version 3 is that I do not believe your installation requirement checks go far enough in that they allow a user to actually install the application into an environment that really cannot support an active board and allow all the basic functionality to be utilized. Setting the expectation up front for the minimum system requirements for the application to fully function without error or exceeding a *minimum* resource allocation is more important than allowing the application to install successfully only to disappoint after the fact with resource usage issues.

[naderman]

Sounds very good, so please change it

[bolverk]

Yeah...sure. You have a list of supported web servers/appliances, at least ones that Rhea will be tested and supported under?

Apache
IIS version 7+ ?
Nginx
Litespeed
Cherokee
lighttpd

What about backends? At a minimum the current ones with the possibility of upping the existing version requirements?

MySQL
MSSQL
Oracle
PostgreSQL
SQLite
Firebird
DB2

[naderman]

The list of databases looks good, I'd add DB2 (planned for 3.1 too). As for webservers I'd say at least IIS, Apache and lighttpd. I can't even tell which webservers phpBB3 is tested on at all. As it's in the wiki I'd say we put in something for a start (maybe even with a remark like "perhaps") and then edit it once we have a clearer idea.

[bolverk]

The web servers should *theoretically* be transparent but it's always good to define the ones the application has been tested/benchmarked on and hopefully supported under. I know in support there was a growing number of Litespeed & Cherokee installs that I happened across while helping users and of course the ever present and growing IIS market share.

**edit**

As it's in the wiki I'd say we put in something for a start (maybe even with a remark like "perhaps") and then edit it once we have a clearer idea.

What do you think of using italics as the formatting convention for any tentative content, things that are still under review or discussion? So instead of remarking "perhaps" the italicized content would indicate the status as preliminary rather than defined.

[ToonArmy]

http://wiki.phpbb.com/PhpBB4/Requirements

[code reader]

http://wiki.phpbb.com/PhpBB4/Requirements

IMHO, this kind of page is more suitable as a "Tested with" or "Known to work with" than requirements.
a php-based app does not "Support" specific web-servers.
the web servers, if they support PHP, are supposed to be compatible with *any* php application (with the regular stipulations of availability of specific php modules, available memory etc.)
more suitable for "requirements" would me, IMO, a list of required php library such as

php-mysqlInd (to work with Mysql), php-postgresql (to work with PosstgreSQL)
this is of limited value for libraries which are installed by default by most or all distros, and becomes more important when some feature needs more esoteric support.


peace.

[bolverk]

IMHO, this kind of page is more suitable as a "Tested with" or "Known to work with" than requirements.

As a Project Manager myself for a Fortune 500 company here in the United States I have spent almost 10 years in professional software development and not a single (out of dozens) software project I've worked on in the last decade has ever NOT specified the pre-requisite environment system dependencies an application is developed to run under. Such dependencies are most definitely requirements that belong in the SRS and they are the very foundation for validation and test documentation developed further into the development cycle, which will trace back directly to the initial requirement specification. It is important to be clear that the goal is to develop an application that will install and run equally well on any specified web server environment, with no application component or design favoring one web server environment over another. Today with version 3.x that is not the case, hopefully Rhea will bring real transparency to the end user in this regard.

[code reader]

kudos for your credentials.
this aside, i am not challenging the need for a "requirements" page, i just doubt that things like the http server belong there, IOW, i do not think the *current* list at http://wiki.phpbb.com/PhpBB4/Requirements (as it exist at the time of writing this: it's a wiki, so it can change at any minute...) makes sense.

much more suitable would be something like:
PHP version X or higher, with at least Y memory available.
DB engine: *one* of the following:
Mysql version X
postgress version Y
...

with the appropriate php library to support it.

graphic library X

etc.

in addition, specific features (such as certain version of captcha) can and should list any additional requirements if they need to.

however, a list of servers is more appropriate as "tested with" than a requirement. a sever that does not appear in the "requirements" list may or may not work well with phpbb, so a server in the list is not "required", it is just that a server outside the list of "tested with" was not yet reported as being compatible.

peace.

[bolverk]

this aside, i am not challenging the need for a "requirements" page, i just doubt that things like the http server belong there, IOW, i do not think the *current* list at http://wiki.phpbb.com/PhpBB4/Requirements (as it exist at the time of writing this: it's a wiki, so it can change at any minute...) makes sense.

Then I can only assume you do not have the underlying skill set and background in software development process that would allow it to *make sense* to you. Regardless of it's making sense to you, it is in fact an industry standard and I explained exactly why along with the two-fold value it adds by being defined as such. What part of my previous explanation are you having difficultly with? Or did you not even read it?

much more suitable would be something like:<snipped>

Those details have in fact been mentioned in both my first and second post and will be included in the new section, Dependencies & System Requirements, which is just a subset of the overall Requirements. Did you read any of this topic before you replied?
1st post:

I think you should restructure that page and also rename it to Dependencies & System Requirements this will allow for not only a listing of the applications needed to support phpbb but also allow you to define a minimum baseline as far as system environment variables which you currently do not provide. What I mean by environment variables is a baseline of the minimum system requirements for phpBB to execute, things like PHP memory limit, execution times etc, along with any module dependencies.

2nd post:

What about backends? At a minimum the current ones with the possibility of upping the existing version requirements?

MySQL
MSSQL
Oracle
PostgreSQL
SQLite
Firebird
DB2