Forum OpenACS Improvement Proposals (TIPs): Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages

Collapse
8: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 1)
Posted by Andrew Piskorski on 02/05/04 06:55 AM
The rest of Joel's proposal sounds good to me, but CVS tagging any OpenACS package with the literal string "package" is ugly and possibly error prone. Someone on the OCT please veto this TIP ASAP even if only for that single reason.
Collapse
9: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 8)
Posted by Joel Aufrecht on 02/05/04 09:01 AM
I changed the original TIP to reflect the unanimous feedback that the literal string "package" should instead be the package-specific package-key string.
Collapse
10: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 9)
Posted by Jeff Davis on 02/05/04 09:40 AM
well then I approve too.

One wrinkle though, the change to support rcN in versions requires a change to the plsql proc which compares version
numbers, which means there
needs to be an upgrade script. That upgrade will be a
little tricky since you will need to upgrade the plsql
proc before you go out to figure out which scripts to
run (i.e. to upgrade you need to upgrade...).

Collapse
11: Re: TIP #46: (Proposed) Rules for Version Numbering and CVS tagging of Packages (response to 10)
Posted by Joel Aufrecht on 02/05/04 10:50 AM
No need to add extra hoops - we can keep using b tags into rc for now, and not start using rc tags until the release after we start understanding rc.  will that cover long upgrades - ie, if you go from 4.6.3 to 5.2 and the rc fix is in 5.1.1, will it work or will it require some kind of special reboot?
Collapse
12: Re: TIP #46: Approved (response to 11)
Posted by Lars Pind on 02/06/04 03:22 PM
Approved.

Re Joel's last question, I'm afraid that this would indeed create problems with old installations.

We should go ahead and make the SQL function that determines this right away, so we get this new feature into the installed base as quickly as possible.

But we should not rely on it until we have determined, tested, and verified a solution that works for older installs as well.

/Lars