gramps

> but I'm dubious about going ahead just replacing the buggy scripts and
> recompiling my standard 3.1.1, in case the new scripts call on other
> corrections I don't have in my standard 3.1.1 installation.
> Is it safe to go ahead or not?

Without knowing what you downloaded, it is impossible to say.  The
good news is that gramps31 is a very stable branch with only bug
fixes, not any new features.  So you could get the latest (what will
eventually become 3.1.2) and be reasonably certain things will be ok.

> If not, is it possible to access svn with read-only permission in order
> to update my source tree properly?

Many people (mostly developers) do exactly this.  It isn't too
complicated, but it is geared to developers.  Here are the steps most
developers follow to run from a subversion copy versus a full
installation:

http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Running_a_development_version_of_Gramps

Those steps assume you want "trunk".  This is not what you want.  You
need gramps31.  So the svn co command for you should be:

    svn co https://gramps.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gramps/gramps31

Stéphane

Stéphane Charette wrote:
>> but I'm dubious about going ahead just replacing the buggy scripts and
>> recompiling my standard 3.1.1, in case the new scripts call on other
>> corrections I don't have in my standard 3.1.1 installation.
>> Is it safe to go ahead or not?
>>     
>
> Without knowing what you downloaded, it is impossible to say.  The
> good news is that gramps31 is a very stable branch with only bug
> fixes, not any new features.  So you could get the latest (what will
> eventually become 3.1.2) and be reasonably certain things will be ok.
>
>   
>> If not, is it possible to access svn with read-only permission in order
>> to update my source tree properly?
>>     
>
> Many people (mostly developers) do exactly this.  It isn't too
> complicated, but it is geared to developers.  Here are the steps most
> developers follow to run from a subversion copy versus a full
> installation:
>
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Running_a_development_version_of_Gramps
>
> Those steps assume you want "trunk".  This is not what you want.  You
> need gramps31.  So the svn co command for you should be:
>
>     svn co https://gramps.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gramps/gramps31
>
> Stéphane
>   
Thanks Stephane.
Do I need authorisation to access svn this way?

Doug

2009/5/26 Doug <doug_bainbridge@...>:

>> Many people (mostly developers) do exactly this.  It isn't too
>> complicated, but it is geared to developers.  Here are the steps most
>> developers follow to run from a subversion copy versus a full
>> installation:
>>
>> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Running_a_development_version_of_Gramps
>>
>> Those steps assume you want "trunk".  This is not what you want.  You
>> need gramps31.  So the svn co command for you should be:
>>
>>     svn co https://gramps.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gramps/gramps31
>>
>> Stéphane
>>
> Thanks Stephane.
> Do I need authorisation to access svn this way?


No, you don't need authorisation to download from svn.  Just use the
command Stéphane wrote.  To commit changes you need extra permissions.


Espen

Espen Berg wrote:
> 2009/5/26 Doug <doug_bainbridge@...>:
>
>   
>>> Many people (mostly developers) do exactly this.  It isn't too
>>> complicated, but it is geared to developers.  Here are the steps most
>>> developers follow to run from a subversion copy versus a full
>>> installation:
>>>
>>> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Running_a_development_version_of_Gramps
>>>
>>> Those steps assume you want "trunk".  This is not what you want.  You
>>> need gramps31.  So the svn co command for you should be:
>>>
>>>     svn co https://gramps.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gramps/gramps31
>>>
>>> Stéphane
>>>
>>>       
>> Thanks Stephane.
>> Do I need authorisation to access svn this way?
>>     
>
>
> No, you don't need authorisation to download from svn.  Just use the
> command Stéphane wrote.  To commit changes you need extra permissions.
>
>
> Espen
>   
Thanks, Espen

Doug