[documentation] Problem With One of the Main CVS Pages

[Shai Gluskin]

Steve,

Yes, you've summarized exactly what I intend to do.

Shai

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Steven Peck <sepeck at gmail.com> wrote:

> Why not add all three use cases and examples?  One for the HEAD
> version of a release (Drupal 6) and another for a specific version
> (Drupal 6.6) with the use cases you've just outlined?
>
> That gives three use cases and examples
>
> Development on the next generation
> Drupal 7
>
> Testing/bug fix on existing mainline stable branches (which is still
> ongoing - see bug tracker)
> Drupal 6 HEAD
>
> CVS Pull of current production release for whatever
> Drupal 6-6
>
> These are not uncommon use case scenarios in our community and it does
> no harm for people to be introduced and grow accustomed to such things
> they may not have encountered before.
>
> Steven
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Shai Gluskin <shai at content2zero.com>
> wrote:
> > Greg, Ryan, and Documentors,
> >
> > After reading Ryan and Greg's responses, the solution seems obvious...
> the
> > page shouldn't make any assumptions or determine priorities for
> use-cases.
> > It should be verbose with sections clearly labeled.
> >
> > -- this is how you check out HEAD and this is why you'd want to check out
> > HEAD
> > -- this is how you check out a specific version and this is why you'd
> want
> > to check out a specific version
> >
> > Greg wrote:
> >>
> >> The only drawback I can think of for doing that is it will require us to
> >> update that page whenever a new version is released.
> >
> > I think as long as it is clear that the text you are providing as a
> sample
> > is a variable (replace "Drupal-6-6" with the most recent stable
> release.").
> >
> > Point of clarification needed:
> > Greg, what you wrote makes me ask a further clarification. It has been my
> > experience that if you specify "DRUPAL-6" you'll get HEAD for Drupal 6.
> In
> > order to get the most recent stable release of Drupal 6, you'd have to
> > specify like this: DRUPAL-6-6.
> >
> > Since D-6 is not under active development, it is true that the
> differences
> > between the latest stable release and HEAD will be minimal. However,it is
> > still better to use the stable release rather than HEAD, in my opinion.
> My
> > experience has been that if I checkout "DRUPAL-6" --- the admin pages,
> > update status etc. will show the version as "6.7" when the latest stable
> > release is 6.6. I find that disconcerting. Also, I don't know how Update
> > Status would respond when 6.7 actually does get released.
> >
> > Greg -- am I missing something here?
> >
> > Another Point of clarification needed:
> > The docs page in question mentions that there might be times when you'd
> want
> > to check out a release of Drupal (presumably HEAD) for a specific date.
> It
> > mentions no use-case. This is my guess: you are testing a patch and the
> > patch command requires that it be applied to the precise version that the
> > patch was created against. Given the sometimes slow work of volunteers,
> it
> > can easily happen that new versions of HEAD are created before folks have
> > had a chance to test a patch. Instead of requiring the patch-creater to
> keep
> > rolling against a new HEAD, testers can simply patch against a precise
> > version of HEAD that existed in the past. Please confirm (or reject) that
> > I've got the use-case correct here.
> >
> > Thanks much,
> >
> > Shai
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Greg Knaddison - GVS
> > <Greg at growingventuresolutions.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Ryan Cross <drupal at ryancross.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Disagree.
> >>
> >> Disagree.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > it is very standard practice for people jumping into a new open source
> >> > project to want to see HEAD (or trunk or whatever) or for people's
> first
> >> > interest in CVS is to see "what's coming". Most people that are
> >> > interested
> >> > in checking out a specific version (like a stable version) are more
> >> > advanced
> >> > or experienced with CVS already. Someone's first jump into CVS is not
> >> > going
> >> > to be doing so in an effort to make upgrading easier.
> >>
> >> Maybe, but this is Drupal.  The installer in Drupal7 gets completely
> >> broken on a pretty regular basis, and that's not a new thing - things
> >> like that often happen in HEAD.  I agreed with Shai's proposal.  I
> >> think it should primarily explain how to check out DRUPAL-6.  The only
> >> drawback I can think of for doing that is it will require us to update
> >> that page whenever a new version is released.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Greg
> >> --
> >> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
> >> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
> > List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
> >
> --
> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20081120/a11b7312/attachment-0001.htm