Forum OpenACS Q&A: Re: Installation 5.2.2

Collapse
2: Re: Installation 5.2.2 (response to 1)
Posted by Malte Sussdorff on 01/23/06 08:47 AM
Well, first of all *NEVER* install all packages. Packages are in there that are prone to be broken.

Second of all, contacts in 5.2 is not up to date. It was a mistake to commit the code from HEAD to 5.2 so the best thing to do is get rid of contacts in 5.2 preventing anyone from using an out of date version until I come around and properly *release* it (note: Contacts is *NOT* released.)

The question I ask myself though: Why do we have maturity levels in 5.2 if "0" does not mean "is broken, don't install".

Collapse
4: Re: Installation 5.2.2 (response to 2)
Posted by Gabriel Burca on 01/25/06 06:02 AM
Is there a list of packages that are safe to install on 5.2.2?

It's great that there's maturity level info for each package, but nothing shows up in the "Maturity" column when doing an install from the repository, so the only way to find out is to attempt an install and cross your fingers (or poke around the CVS for the *.info files).

After fixing the install.tcl file so that the maturity level shows, I see that *all* packages are at maturity level "0" (either that or there's another bug in extracting the real maturity level). That's not very useful.

I tried installing "File Storage" on a fresh 5.2.2 install and it has as one of the dependencies "Mail Services Lite" which is broken (the error claims acs_mail_lite::after_install is missing).

Once everything works as designed, would it be possible for any particular package to have a maturity level higher than the least mature dependency?

What's annoying when a package fails to install is that I don't know if it leaves the system in a consistent state. Are all the changes rolled back automatically (since the backend is a transactional database), or are we left with crud laying around after a failure? I guess I know the answer, but I wish it were different.