Thread: [Postfixadmin-devel] 2.3.3 release?
Brought to you by:
christian_boltz,
gingerdog
Menu
▾
▴
postfixadmin-devel
|
From: Christian B. <pos...@cb...> - 2011-03-03 21:38:30
Attachments:
diff--2.3.2--2.3-branch.txt
|
Hello,
I just checked the full diff between 2.3.2 and what we have in the 2.3
branch currently. This lead to the revert of using table_by_key() in
db_delete to avoid breaking (or having to change) delete.php - see my
commit some minutes ago.
Besides that, the diff (see [1]) looks good and we don't have critical
open bugs in the bugtracker.
Therefore I propose to release PostfixAdmin 2.3.3 from the 2.3 branch.
IMHO we only need to do three things before doing the 2.3.3 release:
- change $version in functions.inc.php to 2.3.3
- enter date and SVN revision in CHANGELOG.TXT
- tag the release (svn cp to tags/)
Please give the 2.3 branch a test and report back if everything works.
@David: (If nobody objects or finds a regression in the 2.3 branch)
As always, please send me the the tarball and the .deb (and,
if you want, a GPG signature for each of the files as *.asc).
I'll then create a RPM package and GPG signatures and upload everything
to SourceForge.
Here's the changelog for 2.3.3:
Version 2.3.3 - 2011/**/** - SVN r*** (postfixadmin-2.3 branch)
---------------------------------------------------------------
- create-alias: allow multiple alias targets
- create-alias, edit-alias: prevent input data loss on validation errors
- list-virtual: fix displaying of 'modified' column for aliases when using
postgres
- replaced deprecated split() with preg_split() or explode()
- functions.inc.php: better error messages when database functions are missing
- create domain: fixed typo in variable name that broke the default value for
default aliases
- postgres: changed mailbox.quota, domain.quota and domain.maxquota fields
to bigint to allow mailboxes >4 GB (run setup.php to upgrade your database)
- vacation.pl logged literal $variable instead of the variable content at two
places
- POSTFIX_CONF.txt: fixed filename for quota map
- config.inc.php: removed double $CONF['database_prefix']
- config.inc.php: fixed comments about domain_post* script parameters
- updated INSTALL.TXT and UPGRADE.TXT
- sk translation update
- some more minor fixes
Regards,
Christian Boltz
[1] svn diff -r860:980 - see the attached file
--
Well, I guess, Stephan knows very well, what the fuzz is about: it's
about hundreds of patches, which will have to be regenerated, done as
an employment-creation measure for this lazy gang of packagers.
[Hans-Peter Jansen in opensuse-packaging]
|
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2011-03-03 22:27:37
|
On 2011-03-03 4:38 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: > Besides that, the diff (see [1]) looks good and we don't have critical > open bugs in the bugtracker. What about the broken logging bugs I reported? I'd really like to see them fixed... I know they aren't exactly 'critical', but they are 'not good'... 3150296 - Vacation logging is broken 3148694 - Modifying a users vacation as user is DOUBLE logged 3148692 - Modifying a users vacation as admin is not logged |
|
From: Christian B. <pos...@cb...> - 2011-03-04 23:14:43
|
Hello, Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2011 schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 2011-03-03 4:38 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: > > Besides that, the diff (see [1]) looks good and we don't have > > critical open bugs in the bugtracker. > > What about the broken logging bugs I reported? I'd really like to see > them fixed... I'd also prefer to have an empty bug list ;-) but if we wait with the release until we reach that status, you'll see PostfixAdmin 2.3.3 in two years - if nobody finds new bugs ;-) (see sig *g*) OTOH, what we have in the 2.3 branch now (see my changelog sniplet) includes one major and long-standing bugfix (multiple alias targets in create-alias) and several smaller fixes. I really want to have those fixes released. This doesn't mean I/we won't fix the bugs you reported, it just means that they won't make it in the 2.3.3 release. I also would like to get SVN trunk in a state that we can release as stable version to make the new features (commandline interface, vacation start/end date etc.) available for more users. You probably noticed that we are going to move most code into PHP classes. As a side effect, we get several bugfixes more or less "for free" which would cause quite some work in the old code. (This also means I won't backport every small bugfix if backporting would be too much work.) That said: I won't have time to work on PostfixAdmin in the next days because the carnival season is in its end phase and I'm on tour with a big float in some carnival parades the next 4 days. If you send patches for one or more of your bugreports until ash wednesday that are not too intrusive (and don't look dangerous to me), I'll include them for 2.3.3. Regards, Christian Boltz -- [Re: Status of 2.2 release?] Erm.. Christian tends to keep creating new 'blocker' tickets (normally when he closes another!) ... :) [GingerDog in https://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=4895826] |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2011-03-06 16:39:50
|
On 2011-03-04 6:14 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2011 schrieb Tanstaafl: >> On 2011-03-03 4:38 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: >>> Besides that, the diff (see [1]) looks good and we don't have >>> critical open bugs in the bugtracker. >> What about the broken logging bugs I reported? I'd really like to see >> them fixed... > I'd also prefer to have an empty bug list ;-) but if we wait with the > release until we reach that status, you'll see PostfixAdmin 2.3.3 in two > years - if nobody finds new bugs ;-) (see sig *g*) I understand, but logging bugs, imo, should be given a higher priority, because without proper logging, finding *other* bugs is much harder or even impossible (especially for non programmers like myself)... > OTOH, what we have in the 2.3 branch now (see my changelog sniplet) > includes one major and long-standing bugfix (multiple alias targets in > create-alias) and several smaller fixes. > > I really want to have those fixes released. This doesn't mean I/we won't > fix the bugs you reported, it just means that they won't make it in the > 2.3.3 release. Understood, and can't complain if you decide to go ahead... ;) > That said: I won't have time to work on PostfixAdmin in the next days > because the carnival season is in its end phase and I'm on tour with a > big float in some carnival parades the next 4 days. Sounds like fun... so have some (fun, that is)! :) > If you send patches for one or more of your bugreports until ash > wednesday that are not too intrusive (and don't look dangerous to me), > I'll include them for 2.3.3. If I was a programmer, I'd be happy to, but alas... |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2011-03-06 19:18:44
|
look at rev. 981 I think i have fixed the logging problem. Am 06.03.2011 17:39, schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 2011-03-04 6:14 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: >> Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2011 schrieb Tanstaafl: >>> On 2011-03-03 4:38 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: >>>> Besides that, the diff (see [1]) looks good and we don't have >>>> critical open bugs in the bugtracker. >>> What about the broken logging bugs I reported? I'd really like to see >>> them fixed... >> I'd also prefer to have an empty bug list ;-) but if we wait with the >> release until we reach that status, you'll see PostfixAdmin 2.3.3 in two >> years - if nobody finds new bugs ;-) (see sig *g*) > I understand, but logging bugs, imo, should be given a higher priority, > because without proper logging, finding *other* bugs is much harder or > even impossible (especially for non programmers like myself)... > >> OTOH, what we have in the 2.3 branch now (see my changelog sniplet) >> includes one major and long-standing bugfix (multiple alias targets in >> create-alias) and several smaller fixes. >> >> I really want to have those fixes released. This doesn't mean I/we won't >> fix the bugs you reported, it just means that they won't make it in the >> 2.3.3 release. > Understood, and can't complain if you decide to go ahead... ;) > >> That said: I won't have time to work on PostfixAdmin in the next days >> because the carnival season is in its end phase and I'm on tour with a >> big float in some carnival parades the next 4 days. > Sounds like fun... so have some (fun, that is)! :) > >> If you send patches for one or more of your bugreports until ash >> wednesday that are not too intrusive (and don't look dangerous to me), >> I'll include them for 2.3.3. > If I was a programmer, I'd be happy to, but alas... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You > This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details > its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative > solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2011-03-06 21:19:52
|
On 2011-03-06 2:19 PM, Rudi Floren wrote: > look at rev. 981 > I think i have fixed the logging problem. Well... I try to stick with my package manager, especially for mission critical stuff. Where/what was the fix? Is it something I can apply by simply replacing one or two files? I could do that... :) |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2011-03-06 21:21:06
|
On 2011-03-06 4:19 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2011-03-06 2:19 PM, Rudi Floren wrote: >> look at rev. 981 >> I think i have fixed the logging problem. > > Well... I try to stick with my package manager, especially for mission > critical stuff. > > Where/what was the fix? Is it something I can apply by simply replacing > one or two files? I could do that... :) Oh... totally forgot to say... THANKS! for working on it! :) |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2011-03-06 21:22:11
|
No you can't. It wasn't compatible with 2.3 sry. But Christian is working on it right now. He writes a 2.3 compatible bugfix. greets Rudi Am 06.03.2011 22:19, schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 2011-03-06 2:19 PM, Rudi Floren wrote: >> look at rev. 981 >> I think i have fixed the logging problem. > Well... I try to stick with my package manager, especially for mission > critical stuff. > > Where/what was the fix? Is it something I can apply by simply replacing > one or two files? I could do that... :) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You > This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details > its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative > solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2011-03-06 21:25:28
|
On 2011-03-06 4:22 PM, Rudi Floren wrote: > No you can't. It wasn't compatible with 2.3 sry. > But Christian is working on it right now. > > He writes a 2.3 compatible bugfix. You guys rock... :) > greets Rudi > Am 06.03.2011 22:19, schrieb Tanstaafl: >> On 2011-03-06 2:19 PM, Rudi Floren wrote: >>> look at rev. 981 >>> I think i have fixed the logging problem. >> Well... I try to stick with my package manager, especially for mission >> critical stuff. >> >> Where/what was the fix? Is it something I can apply by simply replacing >> one or two files? I could do that... :) |
|
From: Christian B. <pos...@cb...> - 2011-03-06 21:49:24
|
Hello,
Am Sonntag, 6. März 2011 schrieb Rudi Floren:
> look at rev. 981
> I think i have fixed the logging problem.
Yes, but that's SVN trunk.
Your change is very good as long-term solution, but too intrusive for
backporting it to the 2.3 branch IMHO.
@Tanstaafl: The change basically is to drop large parts of
edit-vacation.php and use the code from model/VacationHandler (which is
already used by users/vacation.php).
I had a look at the 2.3 code and added code to fix
3148692 - Modifying a users vacation as admin is not logged
The changes were not too difficult, and should not cause any
regressions.
If you want to test my changes, try SVN r987 from the 2.3 branch.
Be warned that
3148694 - Modifying a users vacation as user is DOUBLE logged
also applies to the code I added - I'd say that's better than no
logging ;-)
See my comment in the bugreport for the technical details.
Regards,
Christian Boltz
--
Nein, es geht nicht um eine Sammlung von Pornobildern. Ich sag's
lieber gleich, weil die Leute immer breit grinsen, wenn ich von
"vielen winzigen Dateien" spreche. :-)))
[Ratti in suse-linux über seine Fontsammlung]
|
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X