Livelink SDK Builder problems and questions (please help)

Hello AllI work on a company which aims to learn and then provide support and extesions for Livelink. Livelink is new to everyone here and we're trying to look at how it works and how it can be extended. My job is to look into OScript and the Builder.I have come to the conclusion that one hand, it is good that Livelink is extensible and I don't mind OScript, which is easy to learn. However, on the other hand the IDE is extremely premitive. The following problems are partucularly annoying and can hardly be found in any other development environment nowadays:1) The builder can only manipulate modules from the Livelink that is istalled on the same machine (local). This makes team work very difficult and produces problems when we have to integrate the work of many developers into one Livelink instance.2) The Builder can not work concurently with the Livelink server service, so there needs to be an upgrade everything must stop. This does not make Livelink very appealing to our clients, as they want to be able to use Livelink at all times3) The modules can only be manipulated through the builder, which does not have any of the features taken for granted nowadays live syntax highlighting, the ability to change fonts and font size, the ability to apply changes whithout restarting.Does anyone here have a different opinion on this? If so I would like to hear it. Also, if anyone could suggest sollutions to the above problems, it would be greately appriciated (especialy problem 1). I thank you in advance!YiannosReply With Quote

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

1) Maybe I feel that Open Text themself has sometimes splitted modules into two as a bad workaround. We have done the same that developer xx is doing module A with some functionality and developer yy is doing module BMaybe look into the new Java module we can at least hope it will be more mature IDE ....2) Yes3) Yes the builder gives you memories of the 80:s when you look at IDE hopefulle life will be better with Java, but as the current java module is not the first try to make Livelink java enabled I think it is better to see than believe...RegardsMagnus SalgoPs. I think some pople did a webbased development environment for the builder but I don't know who

ATHANASSIOS_FAMELIARIS

I completely agree with you, but I have no high hopes from Java integration. I think that even if it does happen, it will only change the syntax, since Livelink architecture will remain the same and just as complicated. Java will probaly complicate things even further, as we will have to deal with both Java and Oscript syntax. Builder will be just as bad of course. Thanks for sharing your view!YS

eLink User

Message from Alex Kowalenko via eLinkSDK Builder may look primitive but yet is powerful in its simplicity.Yes, improvements are certainly warranted. Find out what Open Textdirections are. Lobby if the direction does not appeal to you.Meanwhile, my opinion is that programmers depend too much on fancy IDEfeatures. Like with the calculator, people now cannot add simplenumbers. In my experience interviewing and working with programmers Ihave found that it's a smoke screen that bad programmers can hidebehind. Those who complain often have something to hide.Your comments...1) I have managed developments with teams of many people and modules. Ittakes some care and, yes, careful design work to orchestrate a teamenvironment. A fancy IDE is no excuse for bad or no design.2) Stop a server when upgrading... is this a problem? Do you practisestaged development at all? When it comes time to upgrade a productionLivelink server it is not unlike any other upgrade. You do it in amaintenance window. Upgrades actually take only minutes. Planning takesa much longer time. Practise it. Upgrades should be phased in wellspaced intervals. Successful testing on QA and preproductionenvironments always precede the carefully planned production upgrade.3) My violin cries, my guitar weeps, for you.Looking for quick fixes? Not here. Take the time to learn and master theenvironment. It will server you well.-alex------Original Message-----From: eLink Discussion: Development Discussion[mailto:development@elinkkc.opentext.com] Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 10:09 AMTo: eLink RecipientSubject: Livelink SDK Builder problems and questions (please help)Livelink SDK Builder problems and questions (please help) Posted byZeti, Stavroula on 10/16/2004 10:02 AMHello AllI work on a company which aims to learn and then provide support andextesions for Livelink. Livelink is new to everyone here and we'retrying to look at how it works and how it can be extended. My job is tolook into OScript and the Builder.I have come to the conclusion that one hand, it is good that Livelink isextensible and I don't mind OScript, which is easy to learn. However,on the other hand the IDE is extremely premitive. The following problemsare partucularly annoying and can hardly be found in any otherdevelopment environment nowadays:1) The builder can only manipulate modules from the Livelink that isistalled on the same machine (local). This makes team work verydifficult and produces problems when we have to integrate the work ofmany developers into one Livelink instance.2) The Builder can not work concurently with the Livelink serverservice, so there needs to be an upgrade everything must stop. This doesnot make Livelink very appealing to our clients, as they want to be ableto use Livelink at all times3) The modules can only be manipulated through the builder, which doesnot have any of the features taken for granted nowadays live syntaxhighlighting, the ability to change fonts and font size, the ability toapply changes whithout restarting.Does anyone here have a different opinion on this? If so I would like tohear it. Also, if anyone could suggest sollutions to the above problems,it would be greately appriciated (especialy problem 1). I thank you inadvance!YiannosReply With Quote[To reply to this thread, use your normal E-mail reply function.]============================================================Discussion: Development Discussionhttps://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303&objAction=viewLivelink Server:https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe

ATHANASSIOS_FAMELIARIS

I'm very surprised to have found a developer with such views! I believe that what you are saying is that you like to hurt. Fancy IDE does not make a good developer, but builder is still very restrictive and primitive and simplicity is a word the Builder has nothing to do with! Being a good programmer does not mean you have to live in the early 90s. I should be able to put two people to work in the same module! I should be able to manipulate my modules without having to be on the machine which stores livelink. I should be able to have more than one people work on the same installation and I should be able to do all of the above remotely. These are things taken for granted nowadays, OpenText has no excuse for providing such a poor environment. It is not about fancy looks, it is about very important practical issues! Also, visual issues such as fonts ARE important some times! I have to work with tiny fonts because Livelink does not allow me to change them. And more than 1 undo wouldn't hurt either!Oscript is ok, but Livelink's architecture is complicated (as indeed and system's) so the developer should have any aid which can make her/his life easier. (And I haven't even mentioned the horrible documentation)Finally, if I install Livelink in an enterprise, trust me, they won't want to be stopping the service at any time, not even for a few minutes. Java and .NET environments offer upgrading without restarting. It is an essential feature! All of the above have nothing to do with hiding the lack of programming skills behind some fancy IDE. We are talking about important features that the programming community has acknowledged for years now. But still, no firm has only good programmers, and this is why ANY aid is welcome.Again, I think that what you are saying is "sure, I would appreciate hurting less, but for now, hurt me plenty because I'm good at it!"In any case, thank you very much for expressing your views in my post and I would greatly appreciate another reply!

eLink User

Message from Alex Kowalenko via eLinkAll very good points that I agree with. As a customer, however, you have the power to affect Open Text directionin development tool and environment. Lobby wisely and with purpose.Attend Open Text user conferences. Continue to provide constructivecomments as you have done. These are only ideas; I can't presume to tellyou how to affect Open Text direction. Only that, as customers, you can.-----Original Message-----From: eLink Discussion: Development Discussion[mailto:development@elinkkc.opentext.com] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:04 AMTo: eLink RecipientSubject: Hmmmm...Hmmmm...Posted by Zeti, Stavroula on 10/25/2004 04:03 AMI'm very surprised to have found a developer with such views! I believethat what you are saying is that you like to hurt. Fancy IDE does notmake a good developer, but builder is still very restrictive andprimitive and simplicity is a word the Builder has nothing to do with! Being a good programmer does not mean you have to live in the early 90s.I should be able to put two people to work in the same module! I shouldbe able to manipulate my modules without having to be on the machinewhich stores livelink. I should be able to have more than one peoplework on the same installation and I should be able to do all of theabove remotely. These are things taken for granted nowadays, OpenTexthas no excuse for providing such a poor environment. It is not aboutfancy looks, it is about very important practical issues! Also, visualissues such as fonts ARE important some times! I have to work with tinyfonts because Livelink does not allow me to change them. And more than 1undo wouldn't hurt either!Oscript is ok, but Livelink's architecture is complicated (as indeed andsystem's) so the developer should have any aid which can make her/hislife easier. (And I haven't even mentioned the horrible documentation)Finally, if I install Livelink in an enterprise, trust me, they won'twant to be stopping the service at any time, not even for a few minutes.Java and .NET environments offer upgrading without restarting. It is anessential feature! All of the above have nothing to do with hiding the lack of programmingskills behind some fancy IDE. We are talking about important featuresthat the programming community has acknowledged for years now. Butstill, no firm has only good programmers, and this is why ANY aid iswelcome.Again, I think that what you are saying is "sure, I would appreciatehurting less, but for now, hurt me plenty because I'm good at it!"In any case, thank you very much for expressing your views in my postand I would greatly appreciate another reply![To reply to this thread, use your normal E-mail reply function.]============================================================Topic: Livelink SDK Builder problems and questions (please help)https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=3721296&objAction=viewDiscussion: Development Discussionhttps://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303&objAction=viewLivelink Server:https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

After reading -alex- posting I get a feeling that you are high on something maybe it is to much builder development I can agree1) Builder is good to follow a request to see where soemthing is happening2) If you get a problem with Open Text modules you can look in the source code and see where they have missed or eve better when you start the builder tha application hangs where there is a problem. After that you can rather easy override the problems with a patch.... I have to many times done this and saved the customer from major problems BUT3) Documentation havn;t been updated since 1999 or something4) Working more people on a module/ same project stinks5) No easy way with versionmanagement more than the module version management6) Without the Hans Stoop module customizationrt life is tough7) The speed to develop with Builder compare with ASP.NET is slow because you have no good support like jumping to functions, generate documentation, syntax highlighting, autoexpand on functions you have written....when you get used to CTRL+SPACE to see what properties are available or what arguments are needed then you get mad in the builder jumpoing aroundMAJOR PROBLEM: Nothing has happened the last 3 years regarding builder development. Even internal Open Text consultants compalains

eLink User

Message from Alex Kowalenko via eLinkRecreational complaining serves no purpose.What I would like to see in this forum are constructive criticisms. Thisis the Developer Discussion forum and one of its objectives is to affectOpen Text direction. If you do not believe this as a group and behaveaccordingly, then this will not happen.Meanwhile, this forum is serving another purpose as a network for mutualhelp among developers.Can the group think how to affect Open Text direction? Responding to myposts generally will not do that.What one could do is:1. Post constructive criticisms, Subject: "Constructive Criticism x".State the fault. Suggest a solution. Use a positive tone.2. Find out who is responsible for this forum and lobby them to respondto these postings.3. Lobby your official Open Text representative.3. Follow the discussion and respond intelligently.4. Persist.-alex- -----Original Message-----From: eLink Discussion: Development Discussion[mailto:development@elinkkc.opentext.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:09 AMTo: eLink RecipientSubject: Affect Open Text direction - even OT people get said when youmention Builder development or documentationAffect Open Text direction - even OT people get said when you mentionBuilder development or documentation Posted by NOVNORUser on 10/27/200404:06 AMAfter reading -alex- posting I get a feeling that you are high onsomething maybe it is to much builder development I can agree1) Builder is good to follow a request to see where soemthing ishappening2) If you get a problem with Open Text modules you can look in thesource code and see where they have missed or eve better when you startthe builder tha application hangs where there is a problem. After thatyou can rather easy override the problems with a patch.... I have tomany times done this and saved the customer from major problems BUT3) Documentation havn;t been updated since 1999 or something4) Working more people on a module/ same project stinks5) No easy way with versionmanagement more than the module versionmanagement6) Without the Hans Stoop module customizationrt life is tough7) The speed to develop with Builder compare with ASP.NET is slowbecause you have no good support like jumping to functions, generatedocumentation, syntax highlighting, autoexpand on functions you havewritten....when you get used to CTRL+SPACE to see what properties are available orwhat arguments are needed then you get mad in the builder jumpoingaroundMAJOR PROBLEM: Nothing has happened the last 3 years regarding builderdevelopment. Even internal Open Text consultants compalains [To reply to this thread, use your normal E-mail reply function.]============================================================Topic: Livelink SDK Builder problems and questions (please help)https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=3721296&objAction=viewDiscussion: Development Discussionhttps://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303&objAction=viewLivelink Server:https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe

Vinay_Varma_(sglcadmin65_-_(deleted))

Hi Alex, Can you share some of the best practices that OT has internally put in place to manage a module's development and release process? I am sure this would be helpful to all the developers.Krishna

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

Dear Alexquote "Those who complain often have something to hide" right now you complain on me ;-)I don't know your position are what you do but the question and feeling you have as a developer is that noone care inside OT and nothing is done.If you take a brand new Livelink installation and installs the Builder and select Help click on the sample Livelink Module Development Guide...It is the same old development guide which we have seen the last 3-4 years but the only improvement is that now someone has Javascript code so you get Javascript error messages all the time....This problem has been shipped for the last 2 years and noone seems to either use the development guide or noone care or noone inside OT test what is shipped ....It is sad to say this is the only "improvement" I have seen in the latest versions...I miss - updated documentation -- css what has been done and how should we handle it-- changes between versions-- the new dc module how to use it-- good guidelines for developing for remote cache-- custom attributes are not documented-- how to call a dll is not documented-- something about the new cookie handling in version 9.2I think we start with that ....start looking on ASP.NET 2.0 , Visual Studio .Net 2005 they you are on another plante... maybe you are right about the calulator but "Those who complain often have something to hide. "You get a feeling that you are lost in the ppt world and have never seen a major development project....I have been sitting on sessions for developers in Chocago etc. where java development environment was presented 3 years ago but nothing has hit the street yet ....You don't feel it is worth spending energy on argueing plus you also feel noone is listening ..RegardsMagnus

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

In version 9.2 module Project Overview and Recommender are starting to use somekind of webpart design where every web page doesn't have just one requesthandler for presenting just information from one source instead you use information from different places presented in sections on the page. To implement this you use - virtual webnodes- sectsion with sectionsettings- custom columnsthis has been introduced in the ll module DC but is not documented please document this..... as this is a key UI concept that Ithink all new LL modules should follow

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

When you in the builder traverse the tree of a module there is no support for arrow left/right to expand a bransch you need to click on the node ....Please add this supprt as it would be faster working in the builder

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

I have done modules for a UTF-8 Oracle system and then the XDB:s to work in a nice way needed to be in UTF-8 (we had frensch text, there is no problem with english text)==> If I run on a standard LL system I need one type of XDB and when I run the same moduel on a UTF-8 system I need to have other XDB:s which is a painSuggestion: Please document how modules for UTF-8 system should be designed and also please redesign how XDB:s ar eused so that we can use UTF-8 XDB:s on "normal" LL installations ....

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

As LL is the from Open Text suggested plattform for Document/Knowledge management and you have a development environment it would be nice to get some kind of guidelines of preffered tools to use for Version management and how more pople should be able to work together in a project.....

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

Please document what requirements it is on a module that should work together with the Remote Cache moduleToday there is an paper from Hans Stoop in the consulting group available but it would be nice to get more information from the product people...

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

Today there is support fro XDB:s and language at a time... What is the direction and when will developers get access to guidelines and betas for developing for a multilanguage environment ....

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

LL has Webservices but it would be nice to be able to extend those webservices with your own webservice and be able to use LL for accessing that information that feeds your own webservce with informationPlease document how to do this

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

A problem when creating modules with database support is how to install them see https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=3653397&objAction=ArticleViewInternally OT has a module for supporting modules with db changes that doesn' install the change under the normal installation instead you do that afterwards --> you don't get the problems mentioned in the article abovePlease share this modules and Guidelines

Jonny_Coombes

Message from Jonny Coombes <jcoombes@opentext.com> via eLink

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">eLink

LAPI + Axis or LAPI + .NET == your own web-services.

Jonny Coombes

Principal Solutions Architect

Open Text Corporation

Tel: +44 (0) 7748 986937

Fax: +44 (0) 1494 679707

Email: jcoombes@opentext.com

YIM: ot_jcoombes

This e-mail is protected by domestic and international copyright laws and treaties and is the property of Open Text Corporation, it may contain confidential and/or trade secret information of the Open Text Corporation and/or its subsidiaries (OTC), and may be subject to legal privilege in favour of OTC. This e-mail may only be lawfully received, accessed, displayed on a computer screen, printed, copied, and/or used by the specific addressee(s) named above (“Authorized Recipient”) for the purpose for which it was sent by OTC. All other rights and licenses to this e-mail are fully reserved to OTC. If you are not an Authorized Recipient, you are required to immediately delete this e-mail in its entirety without printing, copying, using, and/or re-transmitting this e-mail, either in whole or in part. The transmission of this e-mail by OTC is not to be construed as a waiver by OTC and/or the individual sending this e-mail on behalf of OTC of any of their respective rights or privileges at law or otherwise, howsoever arising.

From: eLink Discussion: Development Discussion [mailto:development@elinkkc.opentext.com]
Sent: 28 October 2004 10:54
To: eLink Recipient
Subject: Constructive Criticism Extending Webservices

Constructive Criticism Extending Webservices		Posted by NOVNORUser on 10/28/2004 05:51 AM
In reply to: RE Affect Open Text direction - even OT people get said when you mention Builder development or documentation		Posted by eLink on 10/27/2004 08:13 AM

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

Doing it using LAPI means that if you have a logic inside Livelink you either need1) Extend LAPI whith your own LAPI function which is not supported either ....2) Build the application ones more outside Livelink you get a bad architectureMy keypoint is that if you have the BIL (Business Information Layer) layer inside Livelink and can access that from outside ....Sure its a piece of cake use .Net but soon then you will have your documents in Sharepoint Services ....

Jonny_Coombes

Message from Jonny Coombes <jcoombes@opentext.com> via eLink

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">eLink

Why would using .NET necessarily impy that you then have to store documents inside Sharepoint?

.NET is just a programming/execution environment like anything else. If you think that using it means you then have to go to M$ for everything else, then they've well and truly go you right where they want you. (And the rest of the internet-enabled world).

My point was that if you want to develop rich, course-grained web-services (inline with the main design imperatives of SOA) then this in entirely possible to do, without having to directly access core Livelink code to provide the execution. In fact, I can think of a few reasons why you wouldn't want to access the core directly:

1. External authentication and authorization services.

2. Better demarkation between external facing and internal facing software assets. (Often desirable if you want to provide a secure infrastructure).

3. Better genericism of the web-service tier. (Allowing you to separate the web-service definitions and functionality from the way that it achieves this functionality).

4. Better leverage of internal skill-sets. (Not every organisation has a shedload of Oscript developers waiting in the wings - it's more common to have Java/.NET programmers who can leverage LAPI just as they would any other API).

5. Broader integration capabilities with external software assets. (E.g. MSMQ, JMS etc...)

Cheers

Jonny Coombes

Principal Solutions Architect

Open Text Corporation

Tel: +44 (0) 7748 986937

Fax: +44 (0) 1494 679707

Email: jcoombes@opentext.com

YIM: ot_jcoombes

From: eLink Discussion: Development Discussion [mailto:development@elinkkc.opentext.com]
Sent: 28 October 2004 13:12
To: eLink Recipient
Subject: yes but then you degrade Livelink as the primary place for development

yes but then you degrade Livelink as the primary place for development		Posted by NOVNORUser on 10/28/2004 08:11 AM
In reply to: RE Constructive Criticism Extending Webservices		Posted by jcoombes (Coombes, Jonathan) on 10/28/2004 06:04 AM

Doing it using LAPI means that if you have a logic inside Livelink you either need

1) Extend LAPI whith your own LAPI function which is not supported either ....
2) Build the application ones more outside Livelink you get a bad architecture

My keypoint is that if you have the BIL (Business Information Layer) layer inside Livelink and can access that from outside ....

Sure its a piece of cake use .Net but soon then you will have your documents in Sharepoint Services ....

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

Core Livelink code ?!?!?! Livelinm kis a development platform where you write your own code.... You as an Open Text person need to know that .....---------------------Livelink is a development plattform. You can extend and orphan functions inside Livelink. If you should extend Livelink and the standard product you create your own module to do that ....A) Open Text doesn't support how to extend the above code in a Livelink WEBservice ==> you need to either try to find this yourself or Use .Net and move/duplicate all the Business logic to that plattform.... and maybe use LAPI to access Livelink ===> You need a MR programmer A that knows .NetwebservicesLAPILivelinks internal logic If Open Text told us the way to make your Livelink developed code available in a webservice then it is a much smaller step and the person that should develop in .Net need to be MR programmer B that knows .NetwebservicesSo my point is if Open Text tell us please use Mr programmer A and you fix it I feel that because Mr programmer A, as far as I know not living on this planet, easier to move to a document management platform that is already in the operation system like Windows 2003 and Sharedpoint Services .....CheersMagnus

Magnus_S_(novnoruser_-_(deleted))

I reread what you have written and the problem I see is that you suggest to move all the Livelink logic outside Livelink.No major problems if all User Interface etc. is outside Livelink but how do you extent standard Livelink and use this external logic.....I hope the possibilities to extend Livelink to call external functions will be easier with Java... but today I feel it is 1) Corba2) unsupported DLL integration that is possibleplease correct me if I am wrong and also some information what is comming in the Java module .....and how that will affect the architecture ...will your design above be the way to move .... (away from developing inside Livelink)

Brett_Conley

I've had all the same complaints about the builder environment. I suppose I'm working on a smaller scale than you, since I'm the only one here developing anything for Livelink.One thing that has bugged me tremendously is the lack of a scriptable build tool. We have big things that we build, where the Livelink module is just one part of, and we need to be able to programmatically build it, changing version numbers and such along the way. Every C++ or Java piece of our solution is straightforward--the build environment includes a command-line tool that compiles and builds some source code. As far as I have found, the builder does not.Something that frustrates the problem worse is that we have to have a module that supports Livelink 9.1sp3, 9.1sp4, 9.2, and 9.2sp1. Our module deals fairly deeply with the workings of Livelink, so differences between those versions, like how the login cookie is handled, mean big differences for our code. So we can't have just one module that works on all 4 versions of Livelink--we have to have 4 different versions of the module. And I was having to maintain 4 different sources that all did close to the same thing but handled the differences in each version.I did solve some of my problems by writing my own build module with an accompanying ant task, and figuring out at least how to write the code so that it could be imported into any of the versions and compile and run correctly. Now I have one copy of the source code that I maintain, and I export it out of Livelink to keep in version control. My ant task takes the dump file from version control and sends it to a machine I have set up with my build module, which imports it, builds it, then returns the compiled ospace.But it's a hassle. I still have to store ALL of the source code in one big chunk (I'm a fan of Java's package structure).And I'm with you on the documentation. I've never seen worse. One of the things I dislike the most about it is the lack of support. This site is the only place to get Livelink help. Any Java or .NET (or just about anything else, for that matter), you can just google your problem, and you have a zillion answers at your fingertips. I've never found a Livelink discussion board not owned by Opentext.As for upgrades, I do think you're reacting a little too much. When you upgrade a module, Livelink continues to run. There is one place where you are instructed to restart the service. This is easily done with the "restart" icon in the Windows services dialog. Takes about a second or two to restart. And I believe that any Livelink requests that the web server receives during those couple of seconds will still be served as soon as the server comes back up. So there's really not any downtime, unless your module crashes Livelink. (As bad of a programmer as I am, I've never managed to actually crash Livelink.)

ATHANASSIOS_FAMELIARIS

I can understand your problems. I this it's fair to say, summing up, that everything programmers have come to take for granted in the past 3-4 years and in some cases more, Opentext does not provide.Concerning the restart that is required for module instalations/upgrade. This abnout this scenario: what if your Livelink is accessible via internet. You can have tens of clients logged in. Some of them will definatelly be doing some downloading on other jobs that will stop once the server is restarted. One second is enough to make your clients unhappy. This is why upgrading without restarting is essential. Im not a very good programmer either, and I can't think of a solution to this problem.