HI Alex,
Thanks for the tip. That's what I ended up doing and am happy to say it worked wonderfully. There's a minor changed in DB_Utils.pm that had to be made, the template parser from 2.x integrates easily with 1.x.
What's not as flexible about 2.x as 1.x was some mods that I did in 1.x that can't be done in 2.x. Specifically the ability to turn links into a multi db system with one version - much in the same fashion that dbman was done(at least in the nonsql version ages ago.
This site I've been working on for the last 3 years has the following - An artisans database, a links database, a calendar database, a poetry database and Feedback database. All use a modified version of linkssql 1.x that requires the addition of the following parameter almost everywhere - script.pl?db=something.(making it work everywhere though was quite a chore), but I had to have some way of being able to store wildly different information without having 300 fields for different database. So, this way, each db has it's own template sets, directories, path images folders, uploading capabilities without using a second version of linkssql1.x
Anyway, links 2.x seems pretty much built in defense of someone doing that - ergo less flexible.
peace.
Thanks for the tip. That's what I ended up doing and am happy to say it worked wonderfully. There's a minor changed in DB_Utils.pm that had to be made, the template parser from 2.x integrates easily with 1.x.
What's not as flexible about 2.x as 1.x was some mods that I did in 1.x that can't be done in 2.x. Specifically the ability to turn links into a multi db system with one version - much in the same fashion that dbman was done(at least in the nonsql version ages ago.
This site I've been working on for the last 3 years has the following - An artisans database, a links database, a calendar database, a poetry database and Feedback database. All use a modified version of linkssql 1.x that requires the addition of the following parameter almost everywhere - script.pl?db=something.(making it work everywhere though was quite a chore), but I had to have some way of being able to store wildly different information without having 300 fields for different database. So, this way, each db has it's own template sets, directories, path images folders, uploading capabilities without using a second version of linkssql1.x
Anyway, links 2.x seems pretty much built in defense of someone doing that - ergo less flexible.
peace.