[documentation] Problem With One of the Main CVS Pages

[Shai Gluskin]

Okay Louie,

I've signed you up for the Haftarah for this Shabbat.

Thanks,

Shai

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Shai Gluskin <shai at content2zero.com> wrote:

> 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/e8e2e2c2/attachment.htm