Re: [Slashcode-development] Some experiences in the migration to 2.0

[Chris N. <pu...@po...>]

At 10:00 +0200 2001.04.21, Alvaro del Castillo wrote:
>On 20 Apr 2001 14:26:15 -0400, Chris Nandor wrote:
>> At 19:31 +0200 2001.04.20, Alvaro del Castillo wrote:
>> >I have spent some days to migrate our modified database to slash 2.0.
>> >With the slash1toslash2 script all seems to be migrated well but in my
>> >installation, Debian Potato, the version of MySQL 3.22.32 doesn't
>> >support the MySQL command:
>> >
>> >CREATE newstories SELECT * FROM stories
>>
>> Ack.  Well, realize two things:
>>
>> * Slash 2.2 will almost certainly require MySQL 3.23
>> * Upgrading from 3.22 to 3.23 is very very easy (in my experience, and in
>> the words of others)
>
>Ops, it's a pity. I, as a developer, can migrate easily to MySQL 3.23
>but thinks in users who want to run slashcode but they must use it with
>a distribution.

I dunno.  We asked several times on the lists and on the web site if anyone
had a problem with going to 3.23, and not one person said they did, that I
recall.


>Actually, yo can use it with Debian Potato, a very
>stable and widely used distribution.

Yeah.  Since packages and RPMs are available, and even upgrading from
source is very easy AFAICT, those are all good signs.


>The next stable version for Debian will appear in the end of this year I
>think. But I can make some test and maybe we can generate Debian Potato
>packages for this MySQL version.

For Slash 2.0, yes.  For Slash 2.2, it probably just won't work.  You will
almost surely need 3.23.


>Yes, sure. Maybe the slash 2.2 version will be published when we have a
>new version of Debian. And slashcode can't be limited for a
>distribution. But we must work to make slashcode more and more easy to
>use it with distributions and packages ;-)

Well, at the very least, since Slash 2.0 will be finalized soon and will be
stable and will get all the bugfixes and will work (does work) fine with
MySQL 3.22, the worst case is we tell people to use Slash 2.0.x until their
packages/dist are upgraded to use MySQL 3.23.


>> >But there is a problem. The template-tool doesn't work right. When you
>> >use: template-tool -s index;index;gnome it updates the
>> >index;index;default !!! :-(
>>
>> template-tool gets its information not from the filename, but for the
>> information embedded in the template.  Chances are the section in the file
>> is labelled "default".  Please confirm that this is the case.  Thanks,
>
>Nop, I know it. In the template I change the section to gnome. So the
>template name was index;index;gnome and the section into the file was
>gnome. And when I save it with "template-tool -u slash2 -s
>index:index;gnome" the tool updates the index;index;defautl template.

I have never seen this before, and don't know how it could be the case.  In
Slash::Install::readTemplateFromFile, it just does:

	for(qw| name page section lang seclev description title |) {
		chomp($val{$_}) if $val{$_};
	}

And then in Slash::DB::setTemplate(), it just passes the data along.

The only thing I can figure is that maybe you have some bad newlines (maybe
some CRLFs instead of plain CRs, or maybe some extra spaces or other
characters at the end of the __section__ line?) so that the section was not
defined, which would make it default to "default".

-- 
Chris Nandor                      pu...@po...    http://pudge.net/
Open Source Development Network    pu...@os...     http://osdn.com/