Forum .LRN Q&A: Re: IMS-LD: problem with a level B course

3: Re: IMS-LD: problem with a level B course (response to 2)

Posted by Gustaf Neumann on 10/23/08 06:24 PM

Concerning ns_cache: The system where you are testing seems to have a very old version of ns_cache (older than 5 years). If you run automated tests on xotcl-core, it will flag this problem.

To get an appropriate version, use the following:
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:mailto:anonymous@aolserver.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/aolserver co nscache

IMS-LD should have a "weak dependency" on xowiki/xotcl-core. It should behave well (with restricted functionality) without xowiki available.

4: Re: IMS-LD: problem with a level B course (response to 3)

Posted by Don Baccus on 10/23/08 06:46 PM

Well, the release tarball for nscache is the old one. I don't think we really want to be releasing code that depends on the cvs HEAD version and my guess is the release tarball is what ends up in the AOLserver debian packages, which is what we've all said we want to encourage people to use. In order to ease the installation process, and the horribly unprofessional impression given newbies by our older manual installation process based on bits and pieces of released code, cvs code, and various other magic.

5: Re: IMS-LD: problem with a level B course (response to 3)

Posted by Emmanuelle Raffenne on 10/23/08 07:18 PM

Hi Gustaf,

I was using version 1.5 from the tarball available at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=3152, I upgraded using the CVS version and it fixed it. Thank you.

What functionalities wouldn't be available without xowiki?

7: Re: IMS-LD: problem with a level B course (response to 5)

Posted by Gustaf Neumann on 10/23/08 08:16 PM

Great.

Don't ask me about IMS-LD! I looked into IMS-LD last time two years ago, and did not know about the xowiki integration.

9: Re: IMS-LD: problem with a level B course (response to 7)

Posted by Emmanuelle Raffenne on 10/23/08 08:26 PM

Gustaf,

Oh I see, I misunderstood. When you wrote "...should have a weak dependency..." was a recommendation not a statement. OK, sorry about that.

Thanks again for your help with nscache.