Re: [SourceJammer-users] nice

[Michael C. <me...@in...>]

Robert MacGrogan wrote:

  > --- Michael Casaday <me...@in...> wrote:
  >
  >>I just got through the mess of script-repairing and
  >>archive-converting
  >>and am at the point where I get to actually use SJ
  >>1.1.  I like what I
  >>see.  :)  Keep up the good work.
  >>
  >
  > Great! Thanks, Michael.
  >
  > Do I take it that you have just converted your 1.0 SJ
  > server to 1.1?

Yes.  More on that below.

  > If you've been using SJ for a project
  > in "the real world", even a student project, we'd love
  > to hear about it. We want to put up a page on the site
  > about people and organizations who are really using
  > SJ.

I've been using it to manage the source for a PHP web app I'm writing
called "Exosaga".  It's a very slow moving pet project that may not
go live for some time now.

I also have two other PHP sites I'll be developing for two separate
clients (I'm an indy web dev guy).  I intend to use SourceJammer to
manage the source files (code and images) for both of these projects.

  > I hope the script repairing, etc. was not too bad. Is
  > there anything in the release package you think needs
  > improving?

It wasn't too bad.  I'm not sure the upgrade path I took was the
smartest, but it seems to have worked just fine.

I made a backup of my Tomcat and SJ 1.0 installs and tried to use the
sourcejammer-server-1.1.beta.2-conv.tar.gz package to convert to 1.1.
This didn't seem to work so well.  I was receiving strange errors
involving unfound conf files with paths like "c:\blah\blah" -- even
though I was running the server on Linux -- when I tried to log in
with the 1.1 SJ client.

So I trashed the upgraded installs and instead did a fresh Tomcat
3.2.4 and SJ 1.1 install.  This time it worked fine, but I still
needed my old archives.  I copied the relevant archive files and
directories over from my backup into the fresh install and ran the
convert script that came with the upgrade package.  I've been humming
along nicely since.

My biggest complaint is about the errors in the shell scripts for the
Linux packages. These have already been covered in detail earlier on
this list (/bin vs. /lib and the missing mail.jar and activation.jar
paths). They are a relatively minor annoyance but if they weren't
there SJ would be a LOT simpler to set up.

While I'm giving input I should also mention that it would be nice if
you could see all version comments at the same time when you view a
file's details.  So, instead of just displaying a list of versions
with the version number, date, and user you would also have a field
showing the associated comment.  This way you could see all of the
comments at once instead of having to select an entry and click "View
Comment" for each version.

  > Thanks.
  >
  > --Rob

____________________
mike