CopperMine VS Gallery2

Regular Joined: Apr 17, 2005 Posts: 64

I am deciding between the two, I have not been able to find a site that offers either one of these photo gallerys as a phpnuke addon so I am going to simply install one of them as a stand alone gallery in my sites root directory. I would like to hear the pros and cons of each, I am looking for the one with the best features, the best appearance, user friendy, and security is a big issue, I would like to allow my site members to beable to upload their hunting and fishing pics, would you recommend this, I also would like to disable non members from posting.

VINDSL'S site had coppermine as a addon but I was not able to download it

What do you all think

Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:38 pm

Coppermine = old, not updated for phpNuke, not secure at all
Gallery 2 - new, active integration team for phpNuke (http://www.nukedgallery.net), security tested

Involved Joined: Dec 27, 2005 Posts: 296

Gallery2 is your best bet. The folks at nukedgallery.net are great and will help you each step of the way to integrate Galleyr2 into Nuke. But if you follow the directions to a t, you probably won't even need their help.
I've used coppermine as a standalone before, and while it might be a smidge more user friendly, I think Gallery has more flexibility and better admin control.

Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:26 pm

Plus, Gallery2 was what was going to be integrated into this next release of RavenNuke. And we all know what RavenNuke says is Gospel. Wink

I don't think it is actually going to be added into the next release though because it has too many seperate installation proceedures that might confuse people who are new to installing Nuke and databases. Don't quote me though.

Regular Joined: Oct 01, 2006 Posts: 50 Location: UK

srhh wrote:

I don't think it is actually going to be added into the next release though because it has too many seperate installation proceedures that might confuse people who are new to installing Nuke and databases. Don't quote me though.

Then why not have two versions ..... one with and one without ????

Just an idea

Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:58 am

First, here is a test site where you can see Gallery integrated into RavenNuke:

http://fkelly.org

This is my RN test site and I'm often experimenting there but I do have some pictures out there in Gallery.

I've recommended to Raven that he NOT include Gallery in the distribution for the following reasons:

1. There are a ton of files that are needed. We are talking over 2000 files. To include them with the distribution is saddling everyone who doesn't want Gallery with a lot of overhead. In addition, the FTP process is already one of the major causes of installation difficulties and putting in more files just increases the chances of problems.

2. Gallery has a very elaborate and well thought out installation process. So does Ravennuke for that matter but "integrating" the two really gives no value added to the user. In reality you'd need to run the installation processes separately.

3. I would really recommend that you FIRST get yourself a stable Ravennuke system as one step. Test it for a couple weeks to make sure it's running well. THEN, as a separate step upload the Gallery tar.gz file and go thru their installation. That way, any problems that occur with RN will not get confounded with problems with Gallery.

Be aware that Gallery is very sensitive to the setup of your hosting environment. If you get ownership and permissions for your Gallery data directory right then it can run smoothly but if you don't it can drive you, so to speak, nuts. You may need your host to help you with this at times.

With that said, I have over 1000 pictures out in my production site and have been running Gallery there for almost 2 years. It works great and provides a lot of value added for my users. One of the best aspects is that you can assign ownership of albums to users and then they can manage their own "area" including creating sub-albums and uploading, captioning and managing pictures. That's great if you already have enough to do.

I can't speak to Coppermine at all.

Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:14 am

Thanks for the reply fkelly

I have never used anything apart from coppermine, and the version I am using is the later pcnuke version which I have mildy hacked/secured myself.
I personally think that a site is never secure so make daily back ups to cover any hack attempt.
Although coppermine has a reputation as a back door to phpnuke, I personally have never been attacked via this module, but saying that I am backed up should it ever happen.

I think the problem is that it's not how to stop your site being attacked, but how to quickly get back online should it happen. Getting attacked is very often a case of badluck I feel.

Regards

DogPowell

Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:56 am

I don't know if the Coppermine version does this, but I run my Gallery integration trough a different database than Nuke. Its just an extra measure so if anything does get through to gallery, they still can't access any of the information in my nuke database.