Forum .LRN Q&A: oacs-4-6-1-final and tip of dotlrn-1-0 are not compatible - recommendations?

Request notifications

I am working on a project that needs a fairly recent version of oacs-4-6 - definitely it should include Don's permission improvements, so oacs-4-6-1-final is the minimum version. As learned in another thread it is not advisable to rely on the tip of the oacs-4-6 branch, so we thought we would just check out oacs-4-6-1-final from cvs and upgrade parts of it selectively whenever it becomes necessary.

The problem is that this project also needs dotlrn, and there is no corresponding tag in dotlrn cvs to oacs-4-6-1-final. dotlrn-1-0 is a branch that corresponds to the oacs-4-6 branch.

At first I thought I could be smart and check out dotlrn with -D 2003-03-10 -r dotlrn-1-0 - the date when oacs-4-6-1-final was released judging from the news entry on (how to find out from cvs at what date a tag was set?). It turned out that cvs checked out the MAIN trunk of dotrln instead with that date, so obviously -r and -D don't mix. Or maybe I did something wrong - please tell me if that works for you.

Then I tried to check out the HEAD of dotlrn-1-0, thinking that there would only be a few minor issues which could be resolved by selectively forwarding files from oacs-4-6-1-final, but the number of incompatibilities seems to be too big. E.g. lots of errors like "invalid command name "site_node::instantiate_and_mount", where dotlrn obviously depends on new stuff in oacs-4-6.

Any recommendations where to go from here? What version of openacs are people using that are working with dotlrn-1-0?

it is my understanding that the tip of the 4.6 branch is the most bug-fixed and stable piece of software we have right now since the dotlrn 1.0 and OACS 4.6.2 beta releases are very close.
So you are saying that the recent turmoils related to permissions and apm upgrades are resolved now and the HEAD of the oacs-4-6 branch is mature and safe to use? Are you sure  that there won't be any other major additions to that branch with the inevitable bugs in the near future?

What if I want to make sure our project benefits from the 'guaranteed upgradability' that Jeff states for releases only in the other thread referenced above, and still use dotlrn?

I guess this wouldn't be an issue if dotlrn was in the cvs repository as well - then release tags could span both oacs and dotlrn. Are there any intentions to move dotlrn to cvs, now that openforce closes down?

I just found out that we previously did something wrong with the cvs commands and 'cvs update -r dotlrn-1-0 -D 2003-03-10' actually works the way I expected it. I will try to update the dotlrn sources to that date now and see if that results in a stable system.
Jeff's tagged oacs-4-6-2-b1 and I'll be putting up a tarball later today (in the repository) and I'll be doing the same for dotLRN 1.0 ...

Will the oacs-4-6 tag remain the tag that will eventually be 4.6.2?  Or should we checkout from oacs-4-6-2-b2 and watch commits there?

C.R.: oacs-4-6 is the branch, not a tag. After 4.6.2 is released there will be another tag for it on that branch, but I don't think oacs-4-6-2-b2 will be moved forward. After that release development will continue on that branch (although not that much as until now I guess), meaning you would get the new stuff when specifiying oacs-4-6.

But until that release oacs-4-6 is what will eventually become oacs-4-6-2, yes.