On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 4:49 PM Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In the unifi forums, I still see a lot of people discussing staying on the > 5.x series. > Some of those are from the "if it ain't broke, don't 'fix' it" group (and I can certainly understand the reluctance due to some recent artifacts from the "move fast and break things" approach that ubnt has sometimes been following in the unifi wireless space recently). AFAIK the later 6.0.xxx releases seem to have mostly settled down even if it is clearly still somewhat of a WIP (there are always bugs, in the 5.x series, and the 6.x series). I believe the ubnt controllers now offer the 6.x releases as an upgrade, so it seems likely the 5.x series is now close to dead. In the case of vlans, as I recall, the statement by someone (I don't recall if it was an official ubnt response, or just a community expert) was that the legacy (5.x) way of specifying VLANs for wireless networks does not get upgraded/converted, and one had to redo the various steps to associate the wireless network configuration with a specific network configuration (which can have a vlan on the network definition). Which likely means some may have to change the ways they do things, and those with large configs have a lot of work to prepare to do at the time of an upgrade (which likely encourages one to push off the upgrade to another day). To add to that pain point, from a quick search of the online ubnt documentation I don't see the new ways documented anywhere (just the old ways which no longer work). Documentation lagging code, what a surprise. Oh, and the "new settings" seems to change everything around (and the "old settings" shows some columns that no longer apply in the 6.x configs). > Is there any possibility to offer both packages until things smooth out? I am sure it is possible (create a unifi5 package to maintain legacy controllers?), but that seems like a big ask of Richard to perform for what is likely not a large user base that is going to be impacted (those using vlans are the biggest known group, and I would not expect a large number of vlan users). When all is said and done, one must trust the package maintainer to make good choices, and in this case I would expect Richards personal testing to inform any next steps (as I recall, he built the package because he uses the package, which is the best type of packager (eating one's own dog food, so to speak)). _______________________________________________ rpmfusion-users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
