CatoBase Changes - Page 2

DaveHorn · 02-09-2005, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmel07

I don't mean to steer this thread off topic by any means, and if someone just wants to throw a link out instead, but what exactly do you need to do to use BOSI?

I do think, though, that being able to just run a program and keep everything on one's computer is the main draw of Catobase. However, with that being said, if there was something like it hooked into BOSI. I'd probably figure out how to use it

Webserver, PHP, mySQL.

http://www.bosicentral.com/

An example:

http://www.hitforthecycle.com/bosi/standings.php?lid=3

Note the above is BOSI 1, which is IMHO, superior to BOSI 2 and also includes many of my own developed reports and such.

DaveHorn · 02-09-2005, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SandMan

The average (non-programmer) user would be intimidated by setting up the server, processor and database - some find the current setup a little frustrating at times with the VB app. The user would have to have very little "hands-on" with the setup of any app to make it work for most. I was looking at a SQL7.0 and MSDE runtime setup with the main app written in C+.
Very little user intervention and will work for most people. Again I am no expert on the PC platform (VAX/ALPHA AS/400) but I have programmed for 20 years and feel that I could also offer my services for this program if needed.

Many/Most users won't have SQL Server, I think that would be a big roadblock for more of them.

My current thinking was either a .NET or Delphi application. For a DB I was thinking either PostgreSQL (most powerful, but would need to be setup and installed by the user and most complex), MySQL (wishes it could be PostgreSQL, but would be slightly easier to install for the average user), or a proprietary inline compiled database. The last would be the easiest for the users obviously, but now you are dealing with a proprietary database which pretty much would make it the same as OOTP 7 and useless for other applications/reports. Using an open source DB would allow others to build applications/reports that use the same database. Much the same way CATO and other applications have been developed around using CommishJoe's exporters.

SandMan · 02-09-2005, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveHorn

Many/Most users won't have SQL Server, I think that would be a big roadblock for more of them.

I have SQL 7.0, but I also the MSDE runtime. I would use SQL on my end but then I only need to distribute the runtime and to have a script that creates the database and sets the location on the end user machine. The end user would not need SQL 7.0 and it would be transparent to the end user where the data is coming from. The only down side is that if there is a problem with the data it would not be possible to fix without MS-SQL. Again this may not be a good way of going if there are any free databases out there that would do the job.

I probably look at MS products more than I should. I used to be a MS reselller and purchased the developer pack that included all the OS, Programming tools and applications - at a hefty cost of $2398.

I will at this point step aside and let the pros take care of this exciting new project. As a community we can't let CATOBASE or an alternative program not be available. It is a must have utility - even for SOLO leagues......

DaveHorn · 02-09-2005, 09:00 PM

Ah, I did not realize you could develop using SQL Server and than package it up for the end user using only a runtime.

I have a lot of beefs with SQL Server besides the fact it is M$, but it certainly beats the crud out of Access.

For years, non-biased performance tests show PostgreSQL and MySQL and just about everything else to leave SQL Server in the dust. Its been 18-24 months seen I've seen a recent performance test but I can't imagine all that much has changed...its still M$ afterall.

That and the fact I don't own SQL Server was why I was thinking of going the open source DB route. Although, I do have the .NET development kit which includes that limited connection SQL Server for single user development. But your point about not being able to edit the data is probably the best reason yet to not use SQL Server. A lot of folks like to go into Access and poke around and try to figure out problems or whatever. Using a high cost DB like SQL Server would take that away from many folks.

Certainly do not step aside. If a project like this gets off the ground any and all experienced voices would be good to have around. Regardless of your development experience everyone will have something valuable to offer from the users to other experienced developers. For example, one of first things that would have to be done would be to design the data schema. Cato is great, but I'm sure you've seen the database.

Its sorely needs improvement. Even if you can't write a lick of whatever code the project is developed in it certainly sounds like you'd have valuable input in building a better schema.

I've been delayed at kicking off some of my projects in my head. Working for a living sucks, but sometimes it seems I got so many damn ideas I can't decide where to start or what to do first.

I been wanting to set up a site for folks to get together and work on new OOTP utilities for while. I reserved some domains and was planning to set something up at www.ootpvault.com (currently just points to my league). I've been delayed but have also been waiting for more news regarding v7. But this discussion is probably just what I need to give me a kick in the pants and start thinking about this again. CATO for v7 seems like as good a place as any to start because it seems to be far and away the most used and loved OOTP mod there is.

canadiancreed · 02-09-2005, 09:16 PM

havign options out there for a CATO setup, be it stand-alone or dynamically created through a DB woudl be nice. I think an option for this would be nice, and with SQL Server offering a stand-alone module, that woudl make life a lot easier.

I'd also liek to have it so adding stats manually is a lot easier. A league that I know of that lsot their league files is fidning it amazingly tedious to know where to enter the information so CATO will generate the stats correctly.

Ben Music · 02-10-2005, 10:16 AM

Dave, I'd be willing to help out when and where I can on any project you start. I have ample C# experience, as well as some limited experience with web apps and SQLServer.

Personally, I'd like to see something done for v6, that we could extend for v7, but that is just a preference.

Hoeksam · 02-10-2005, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

havign options out there for a CATO setup, be it stand-alone or dynamically created through a DB woudl be nice. I think an option for this would be nice, and with SQL Server offering a stand-alone module, that woudl make life a lot easier.

I'd also liek to have it so adding stats manually is a lot easier. A league that I know of that lsot their league files is fidning it amazingly tedious to know where to enter the information so CATO will generate the stats correctly.

I'm not sure how many people would sign on to help with a redesign of CATO, but if you end up getting a bunch of people with different programming skills, I don't see why you couldn't have a couple of versions of CATO (a stand-alone version, a dynamically generated version using PHP & MySQL, etc...)

I just started my own league, so I'm a good month or two away from trying to implement CATO for my league, but I've seen it implemented (along with BOSI) in many other leagues, and I think it's a great tool for people who are interested in league history.

I'd be willing to throw my hat into the ring to help out anywhere needed as well. Don't have a super-ton of programming experience, but I do know some PHP and SQL and could help anywhere needed...

jmel07 · 02-10-2005, 01:19 PM

I'll also throw my hat into the ring . . . with C# and .NET programming experience. I agree, it would be great to see something delveloped for V6, and then if it can be used for V7, great.

RJolley · 02-10-2005, 01:47 PM

What would be nice is to have the database not matter for those that want to use different backends. Maybe use ODBC or JDBC for the connection to the database, since that's probably the most generic way to do so. I don't think Perl or PHP would care what the backend is if the access is through a generic db. Then a script to create the tables and indexes with a simple, generic script.

You could code write the code for one db with easy instructions to connect to a free db like PostgreSQL, then have instructions for Oracle, MSSQL, mySQL, etc.

02-09-2005, 09:00 PM	#24
DaveHorn All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,146	Ah, I did not realize you could develop using SQL Server and than package it up for the end user using only a runtime. I have a lot of beefs with SQL Server besides the fact it is M$, but it certainly beats the crud out of Access. For years, non-biased performance tests show PostgreSQL and MySQL and just about everything else to leave SQL Server in the dust. Its been 18-24 months seen I've seen a recent performance test but I can't imagine all that much has changed...its still M$ afterall. That and the fact I don't own SQL Server was why I was thinking of going the open source DB route. Although, I do have the .NET development kit which includes that limited connection SQL Server for single user development. But your point about not being able to edit the data is probably the best reason yet to not use SQL Server. A lot of folks like to go into Access and poke around and try to figure out problems or whatever. Using a high cost DB like SQL Server would take that away from many folks. Certainly do not step aside. If a project like this gets off the ground any and all experienced voices would be good to have around. Regardless of your development experience everyone will have something valuable to offer from the users to other experienced developers. For example, one of first things that would have to be done would be to design the data schema. Cato is great, but I'm sure you've seen the database. Its sorely needs improvement. Even if you can't write a lick of whatever code the project is developed in it certainly sounds like you'd have valuable input in building a better schema. I've been delayed at kicking off some of my projects in my head. Working for a living sucks, but sometimes it seems I got so many damn ideas I can't decide where to start or what to do first. I been wanting to set up a site for folks to get together and work on new OOTP utilities for while. I reserved some domains and was planning to set something up at www.ootpvault.com (currently just points to my league). I've been delayed but have also been waiting for more news regarding v7. But this discussion is probably just what I need to give me a kick in the pants and start thinking about this again. CATO for v7 seems like as good a place as any to start because it seems to be far and away the most used and loved OOTP mod there is. __________________ Dave HFTC Commish

02-09-2005, 09:16 PM	#25
canadiancreed Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 11,660	havign options out there for a CATO setup, be it stand-alone or dynamically created through a DB woudl be nice. I think an option for this would be nice, and with SQL Server offering a stand-alone module, that woudl make life a lot easier. I'd also liek to have it so adding stats manually is a lot easier. A league that I know of that lsot their league files is fidning it amazingly tedious to know where to enter the information so CATO will generate the stats correctly. __________________ PT21 PT22

02-10-2005, 10:16 AM	#26
Ben Music Major Leagues Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 432	Dave, I'd be willing to help out when and where I can on any project you start. I have ample C# experience, as well as some limited experience with web apps and SQLServer. Personally, I'd like to see something done for v6, that we could extend for v7, but that is just a preference. __________________

02-10-2005, 01:19 PM	#28
jmel07 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Minneapolis Posts: 136	I'll also throw my hat into the ring . . . with C# and .NET programming experience. I agree, it would be great to see something delveloped for V6, and then if it can be used for V7, great.

02-10-2005, 01:47 PM	#29
RJolley Major Leagues Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 334	What would be nice is to have the database not matter for those that want to use different backends. Maybe use ODBC or JDBC for the connection to the database, since that's probably the most generic way to do so. I don't think Perl or PHP would care what the backend is if the access is through a generic db. Then a script to create the tables and indexes with a simple, generic script. You could code write the code for one db with easy instructions to connect to a free db like PostgreSQL, then have instructions for Oracle, MSSQL, mySQL, etc.