Hab ich auch schon geschrieben aber darauf reagieren die nicht .
1 Like
Well I could explain now why from developing and integrating view it makes no sense at all to go back but why waste my time if everybody knows better anyways? 
Then you would just get the rest of us explaining why, from a practical user’s point of view, it DOES make sense to “go back”!!!
Even for the users it does not make much sense going back after such a big migration. It would most likely be a lot worse.
What “Big migration” have we actually had then, dammed if i can see it?
1 Like
To go back to how things were when there were no issues (well none to speak of particularly)?
Really?! 
1 Like
THis might be difficult or most likely impossible.
Warum bitte ? Es hat doch früher alles gepasst ?!
1 Like
How is rolling back to the previous/earlier version that difficult, do you not have backups?
I would say the best thing would be to have at least both of the versions availabe. So that the members could be able to freely choose whether to use either the one or the other. Just a small friendly suggestion. 
4 Likes
It sounds like something spectacular from the Serengeti doesn’t it? I think however, that’s just fancy language for ‘new site interface’.
1 Like
You mean like we had when all this started? 
Well yes, that would certainly be a perfectly reasonable compromise.
2 Likes
Well we had both versions running initially as even jabs was using the original version then as was i.
3 Likes
Yeah. Actually. Just to be able to choose freely between the two versions. Must be a nice way to solve things al rightly without the biggest issues. 
3 Likes
Exactly, they could keep updating the beta version whilst we were using the workable version and perhaps try the beta from time to time.
Would have thought that made sense.
3 Likes
But they suddenly withdrew the original with no warning at all.
1 Like
Okay I will try to explain. When doing a big migration you always move forward. Never back. Basically after a migration you wait if there are any so called Showstopper issues. What does that mean? These are issues which could make the site unusable. (For example livestream not working for everybody or all people could not log in at all) This would have been discovered fast and a rollback makes sense. But there were none of these issues at all.
So no Showstopper issues? Okay. All the other problems will be fixed with the “Go forward” Approach. At this point it is clear the new version is the one which is now fixed and further developed on. The old version is no longer needed and can be deleted.
Why you do that? It makes no sense fixing issues and adding features in the new version and at same time making sure all the new features or things will be always in the old version too. There might also be breaking changes in how the new software is run which will cause a lot of work to revert these. Time which can be used for fixing bugs in the new version. So it makes no sense to go back to the old version. Because there might be issues with that too. The problems people report here are not worth at all to go back to the old version.
VHTV does the right thing. Fixing the bugs in the new (current) version and not going back to the old one. This is how modern software development works. “Fail fast - Move forward”
3 Likes
Yeah. As I rather sadly predicted they would do. I must be somewhat a wise man then. I suppose. 
1 Like
Not necessary at all. There are no errors justifying to do that.