From: George C. <ga...@sp...> - 2004-08-11 03:24:27
|
Hi all, Browsing through CVS, I see the R 151 tag, and noticed that 2_3 goes up through tag 156, and the you change over to a 2_5_x_x tags. It appears that the really big changes start with the 2_5 tags, so am I safe in going up to tag 156, or should I stick with the R 151 tag? Is there anything other than the upgrade file that I can use to see what has changed (and why) between tags? Has anyone moved over to the new topic system? Is there any particular 2_5 tag that you would recommend? I've got a new site that I'm going to set up from scratch, and the new topic system looks like the way to go. Thanks, George |
From: Shane <sh...@lo...> - 2004-08-11 10:52:06
|
On Aug 10, 2004, at 5:16 PM, George Clark wrote: > Hi all, > > Browsing through CVS, I see the R 151 tag, and noticed that 2_3 goes > up > through tag 156, and the you change over to a 2_5_x_x tags. It > appears that > the really big changes start with the 2_5 tags, so am I safe in going > up to tag > 156, or should I stick with the R 151 tag? Is there anything other > than the > upgrade file that I can use to see what has changed (and why) between > tags? cvs diff, cvs log, cvs history, are what I primarily use to see what's been happening. (I've been meaning to wrap all that into some sort of script that'd put it all nicely out there, but I've not had the time). > Has anyone moved over to the new topic system? I'm _nearly_ there. See the Slash.SF bug reports. I've been reporting all the problems I've encountered, both there and on IRC. > Is there any particular 2_5 tag > that you would recommend? I've got a new site that I'm going to set > up from > scratch, and the new topic system looks like the way to go. IMHO: Immediately after the new section-topics code was committed, there were a lot of changes committed over the next few weeks. Mostly bug fixes and tweaks. That has apparently slowed *way* down. For me, that's a good sign, and that's when I'll generally start messing with new code and see if I can get it live and in production after testing with it for a while. If I were you, I'd go with the section-topics newest code for your new site. It works pretty well, now, and it is a big improvement from the old system. But it take a bit of getting used to. Having thought of section/topics in their way of working, to this, well, it just takes a bit. One thing to watch out for - is the additional perl modules you'll want to install. See the README in the Slash::Admin plugin for more information. I think there was possibly an addition to the main requirements, but I don't know if whatever it was added is in the Slash::Bundle on CPAN. So just test on another box before you 'make install' on your production machine :) Shane |
From: Jamie M. <ja...@mc...> - 2004-08-11 16:04:23
|
sh...@lo... (Shane) writes: > > Browsing through CVS, I see the R 151 tag, and noticed that > > 2_3 goes up through tag 156, and the you change over to a > > 2_5_x_x tags. It appears that the really big changes start > > with the 2_5 tags, so am I safe in going up to tag 156, or > > should I stick with the R 151 tag? Depends how safe you want to be, so I can't answer that authoritatively. > > Is there anything other than the upgrade file that I can use > > to see what has changed (and why) between tags? You can check the diffs yourself using: cvs diff -U3 -r R_2_3_0_151 -r T_2_3_0_156 | less I just did that and I see the main changes are: * login.pl fully implemented, pulls some code out of users.pl: little real benefit at this time * some mod and metamod code cleaned up; no real benefit unless your site has a lot of moderation taking place (there are probably about 2 sites in the world that would even notice these changes :) * minor improvement to open proxy checking * minor stats improvements * minor SQL optimizations, in comments and elsewhere * minor HumanConf and formkey changes * slightly smarter similar-story detection * more data stripping * performance_stats task; kinda cool but probably not that useful except on very busy sites * a fix to the maintable_end template which fixes some annoyingly broken HTML that really never harmed anything > cvs diff, cvs log, cvs history, are what I primarily use to see > what's been happening. (I've been meaning to wrap all that into > some sort of script that'd put it all nicely out there, but > I've not had the time). I suspect other source code versioning systems are more useful in this regard. CVS really blows. But at one OSCON talk, the speaker had everyone raise their hand who uses CVS (every hand went up); then everyone who uses Subversion (2 hands); then everyone who uses BitKeeper (1 hand). The disadvantage of the least common denominator is that it's the least; the advantage is that it's common. > > Has anyone moved over to the new topic system? >=20 > I'm _nearly_ there. See the Slash.SF bug reports. I've been > reporting all the problems I've encountered, both there and on > IRC. Go Shane! :) > > Is there any particular 2_5 tag that you would recommend? > > I've got a new site that I'm going to set up from scratch, > > and the new topic system looks like the way to go. >=20 > IMHO: Immediately after the new section-topics code was > committed, there were a lot of changes committed over the next > few weeks. Mostly bug fixes and tweaks. That has apparently > slowed *way* down. For me, that's a good sign, That's a good instinct. We worked out a lot of kinks in 2_5 since it first got committed and went live. Over the last week there has been a lot more SQL optimization in there now too. There are still quite a few bugs -- about a dozen on sf.net that are nontrivial, and I know there are about 50 places in the code that we need to go back and check over, and probably fix minor things. But our code development cycle is a little different from other open-source projects. Except for large chunking changes like the section-topics commit in June, we typically have code live on Slashdot typically within a week of committing it. What's on Slashdot now is the T_2_5_0_20 tag, and after tonight it'll be the _21 tag. That's usually quite a trial by fire, and whatever breaks, you can read about on our sf.net bugs page -- sort open bugs by priority descending and you will get a _very_ good idea of what's wrong with almost the very latest Slash CVS. > If I were you, I'd go with the section-topics newest code for > your new site. If I were putting up a new site from scratch, I'd definitely start with the latest 2_5 tag. There will be a few glitches, but _probably_ nothing that will be too annoying, and it'll be easier than starting from 2_3 and later upgrading. Your mileage may vary. > One thing to watch out for - is the additional perl modules > you'll want to install. See the README in the Slash::Admin > plugin for more information. I think there was possibly an > addition to the main requirements, but I don't know if whatever > it was added is in the Slash::Bundle on CPAN. Bundle/Slash.pm should be up to date now. Note the last graf in that file: Our optional modules, which are not required for a default install and thus not installed by default, but which may become required as you edit your site configuration, are: Cache::Memcached Silly::Werder GD GD::Text GD::Graph Apache::SSI Apache::RegistryFilter GraphViz --=20 Jamie McCarthy http://mccarthy.vg/ ja...@mc... |
From: George C. <ga...@sp...> - 2004-08-13 01:12:00
|
** Reply to message from Jamie McCarthy <ja...@mc...> on Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:03:51 -0400 Jamie, Shane, Thanks for your advise on the tag levels and the hints on getting the new code installed. And cvs diff command... that one's a keeper. I've struggled for 2 years trying to figure out what changed, and never thought to ask for an easier way. I'll report back once I have some things happening on 2_5_x George |