We were planning on pushing out 2.1 stable this week - but a few too many "need to fix" issues surfaced (thanks to some dilegent community testers). So we've released a 6th Beta distribution this week and targeted stable release for next week. You canRead more
|IMPORTANT: This feature uses Google's public chart-drawing service. Your monthly and...|
It was an eventful period after beta 4. With excellent support from the community, we were able to identify and close quite a few trivial issues (and a few critical ones). The fifth 2.1 Beta distribution (probably last one before stable) is now available forRead more
The team has been working hard to fix issues/ bugs as well as quite a few improvement suggestions reported by the community - and a third beta release of CiviCRM 2.1 is now available for download on SourceForge. We strongly encourage folks to download and test the beta release and help improve the final product. So test 2.1 Sandbox out now.
If you haven't spent any time with 2.1, do consider downloading and trying out the upgrade - as well as any and all of the new features you're looking forward to.
New 2.1 InstallationsIf you are installing CiviCRM 2.1 Beta from scratch, use the installation instructions linked below: Read more
My self-appointed job is to hangout around here and complain about how CiviCRM could be more like Drupal or better implemented with Drupal. Instead of banning me from the forums and IRC for being annoying, Lobo gave me blogging access. So I'm writing to share about my latest campaign to Druplify CiviCRM.
All the installations I build are done with Drupal, and I've written or improved a number of Drupal 5 modules that interface with CiviCRM. I also have a fairly wide base of clients who are on Drupal 5, might like CiviCRM 2.1+, but can't or won't upgrade to Drupal 6.
So I'm trying to get a sense of how many others there are like me, and perhaps formalize a "task force" to improve Drupal & CiviCRM integration. The very first task would be backporting CiviCRM 2.1 for Drupal 5, which remains supported by the Drupal Project.
Details are on the forum:Read more
Most of you are aware that CiviCRM collects version, CMS and an MD5 hash of the base url from a CiviCRM install. We discussed this feature in the blog post: Extending the Version Check Mechanism in CiviCRM 2.0. The CiviCRM admin can decide not to participate in the ping back mechanism.
Here are some useful stats that we've collected using this feature: We've got close to 4000 installs running CiviCRM v2.0. Approx 66% are Drupal, 34% are Joomla. We have 133 installs testing various versions of 2.1 alpha, 98 Drupal / 35 Joomla.
We are currently trying to figure out what our focus for the 2.2 release should be. We get a lot of feedback from folks on the forums, blog and uservoice. However we do not have any idea of what features are being used with CiviCRM installs out there. For e.g. we have absolutely no idea how many folks are using CiviMember out there. If we knew that...Read more
David Geilhufe (full disclosure: he is on the board of Social Source Foundation, the non-profit behind CiviCRM) has written a good article on What is Donor Management Software. The article discusses some of the potential reasons on the exclusion of CiviCRM from the list of software products. If you do use CiviCRM for donor management, do take the survey and write CiviCRM in the other box.
The non-profit tech community is fairly small and most of us know each other. We did exchange email with Holly Ross (NTEN ED) and she explained that the survey was designed specifically for "software designed to fill the donor management function". She also did acknowledge that there are quite a few "grey areas" in picking what products to list. I'll refrain from nitpicking on some of the choices they've made, but in...Read more