Hi, I have just seen that the latest version for 3.0.4 had been uploaded on download.koha.org Thanks to LibLime for doing that. But for sake of not misleading people, I would find that great that people donot have the choice between 2 versions of 3.0.4 Would any liblimer be so kind as to remove the first 3.0.4 tarball since I cannot do it myself, please ? -- Henri-Damien LAURENT Release maintainer 3.0 branch
Hi Henri-Damien, Every time you roll a release and announce it there should be a version incremented, even if the change was a minor one to correct an error in your previous distribution. This is the generally accepted procedure for release management/maintenance. To date, LibLime haven't been editorializing your files at all, just adding and removing files as requested. The primary reason for this is that your signatures on the release will be invalid if we change the filename. Therefore, we haven't changed 3.00.04_final to 3.00.04. We have left both of those files up on download.koha.org because both of them were announced as part of the project's history and download.koha.org is an archived history of releases to date. You need to send us a new distribution package complete with matching MD5, .asc, and .sig files, all with the correct file name. Please call the new one 3.00.05 rather than 3.00.04_final (or some derivation thereof) and adjust the version string as appropriate in the kohaversion.pl and updatedatabase.pl. In the future please do not send a public announcement to the Koha lists that a release is available until you have confirmed that the file has been uploaded to download.koha.org and is actually available. This will alleviate much of the confusion caused by this last announcement. Note that writing to one of the lists, petitioning for "some LibLimer" to respond is not as effective at getting our attention as is writing us directly as you have done in the past. Sincerely, Joshua On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 6:23 AM, LAURENT Henri-Damien < henridamien.laurent@biblibre.com> wrote:
Hi, I have just seen that the latest version for 3.0.4 had been uploaded on download.koha.org Thanks to LibLime for doing that. But for sake of not misleading people, I would find that great that people donot have the choice between 2 versions of 3.0.4 Would any liblimer be so kind as to remove the first 3.0.4 tarball since I cannot do it myself, please ? -- Henri-Damien LAURENT Release maintainer 3.0 branch _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha.org http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
-- Joshua Ferraro SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE CEO migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@liblime.com |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS
Note that writing to one of the lists, petitioning for "some LibLimer" to respond is not as effective at getting our attention as is writing us directly as you have done in the past.
Better yet, you could grant Release Managers and Release Maintainers direct access to edit the relevant areas of Koha.org and permission to load release files on download.koha.org. -- Owen -- Web Developer Athens County Public Libraries http://www.myacpl.org
Hi Owen, On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Owen Leonard <oleonard@myacpl.org> wrote:
Note that writing to one of the lists, petitioning for "some LibLimer" to respond is not as effective at getting our attention as is writing us directly as you have done in the past.
Better yet, you could grant Release Managers and Release Maintainers direct access to edit the relevant areas of Koha.org and permission to load release files on download.koha.org.
download.koha.org is a site that LibLime created to provide a historical archive of Koha releases done to date. It currently resides on LibLime servers that have other web sites so we're not able to provide direct shell/ftp access at this time. That said, we are committed to triggering any upload request within 6 hours or receipt. While an interesting idea, providing direct access to download.koha.org as you suggest would not have solved the problems that occurred with this last release of 3.00.04. I documented the correct procedure for rolling a Koha release in the misc/release_notes/README.txt file and following that procedure is the best way to ensure that future releases do not suffer the same confusion. Sincerely, Josh -- Joshua Ferraro SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE CEO migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@liblime.com |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS
download.koha.org is a site that LibLime created to provide a historical archive of Koha releases done to date.
It is not a place where the Koha open source project can post its latest releases? If download.koha.org is "historical," then where should Koha releases be posted? -- Owen -- Web Developer Athens County Public Libraries http://www.myacpl.org
Joshua Ferraro wrote:
download.koha.org is a site that LibLime created to provide a historical archive of Koha releases done to date. It currently resides on LibLime servers that have other web sites so we're not able to provide direct shell/ftp access at this time.
OK. Just two problems with that:- Firstly, download.koha.org was promoted as "the usual location" to download Koha from for something over two years, as in http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2008-January/012900.html Secondly, why does it being on a LibLime server mean RMs cannot have direct access at this time? If it were generally true that one cannot log in to another company's server, all the hosting companies would never exist. I expect uploaders would sign reasonable terms of use if LibLime wanted to be really cautious. If it's some technical problem, could we point download.koha.org at another vendor's or library's server for the time being?
While an interesting idea, providing direct access to download.koha.org as you suggest would not have solved the problems that occurred with this last release of 3.00.04. [...]
Yes, I sort of agree with this. Having three 3.0.4s releases wasn't a good thing. However, what's done is done and I expect HDL will have learnt from the mistakes, so this sort of public rebuke seems painful. Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster and LMS developer at | software www.software.coop http://mjr.towers.org.uk | .... co IMO only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html | .... op
Joshua Ferraro wrote:
download.koha.org is a site that LibLime created to provide a historical archive of Koha releases done to date. It currently resides on LibLime servers that have other web sites so we're not able to provide direct shell/ftp access at this time.
OK. Just two problems with that:-
Firstly, download.koha.org was promoted as "the usual location" to download Koha from for something over two years, as in http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2008-January/012900.html I didn't mean to imply otherwise. What I meant to clarify is why we weren't deleting one or more of the 3.00.04 releases HDL distributed--ie, download.koha.org preserves the history of the
Hi MJ, On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 3:02 PM, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote: project's releases and HDL's three 3.00.04 releases are part of that history.
Secondly, why does it being on a LibLime server mean RMs cannot have direct access at this time? If it were generally true that one cannot log in to another company's server, all the hosting companies would never exist. I expect uploaders would sign reasonable terms of use if LibLime wanted to be really cautious. I don't have shell or ftp access to any other Koha company's server so I'm not sure what you mean. But I'm also not interested in a debate about whether or not anyone should or should not have access to LibLime servers or whether or not LibLime should or should not host download.koha.org. We've given the RM/RMaint a perfectly sane way to get releases uploaded to download.koha.org, and the process has been working fine so far.
If it's some technical problem, could we point download.koha.org at another vendor's or library's server for the time being?
While an interesting idea, providing direct access to download.koha.org as you suggest would not have solved the problems that occurred with this last release of 3.00.04. [...]
Yes, I sort of agree with this. Having three 3.0.4s releases wasn't a good thing. However, what's done is done and I expect HDL will have learnt from the mistakes, so this sort of public rebuke seems painful. If this were the first time we've had these kinds of problems with releases I'd completely agree.
Also, Chris Cormack asked about changing the homepage to link to 3.00.04, but so far we haven't heard from HDL about his intentions to roll 3.00.05 to fix the previous issues with 3.00.04 and 3.00.04_final, and to provide a single download point for this release. To avoid further user confusion I suggest we await his comments on that. Cheers, Josh
Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster and LMS developer at | software www.software.coop http://mjr.towers.org.uk | .... co IMO only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html | .... op
-- Joshua Ferraro SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE CEO migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@liblime.com |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS
Secondly, why does it being on a LibLime server mean RMs cannot have direct access at this time?
I don't have shell or ftp access to any other Koha company's server so I'm not sure what you mean.
I have shell/ftp access to several other companies servers: Pair.com, Dreamhost.com, etc. One of the amazing things about web server technology is that it makes it relatively easy to provide secure access to a wide variety of users while giving them varying privileges.
If this were the first time we've had these kinds of problems with releases I'd completely agree.
Is this your way of throwing your hat in the ring? http://wiki.koha.org/doku.php?do=show&id=en%3Adevelopment%3Aroles3.4
Also, Chris Cormack asked about changing the homepage to link to 3.00.04, but so far we haven't heard from HDL about his intentions to roll 3.00.05
How about we update Koha.org to reflect the most current information without speculating about what the future might bring? One of the amazing things about content management systems is that they make it relatively easy to provide secure access to a wide variety of users while giving them varying privileges. -- Owen -- Web Developer Athens County Public Libraries http://www.myacpl.org
Joshua Ferraro wrote:
Firstly, download.koha.org was promoted as "the usual location" to download Koha from for something over two years, as in http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2008-January/012900.html I didn't mean to imply otherwise. What I meant to clarify is why we weren't deleting one or more of the 3.00.04 releases HDL distributed--ie, download.koha.org preserves the history of the
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 3:02 PM, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote: project's releases and HDL's three 3.00.04 releases are part of that history.
Even ignoring the gaps (some understandable like the pipex.com-hosted 2.0 releases, some surprising like the 2.0pres), most of the files there have a much later timestamp than the originals, so it doesn't seem a terribly accurate historical archive. I feel that this sudden new announcement of download.koha.org's purpose is a bit odd.
[...] I'm also not interested in a debate about whether or not anyone should or should not have access to LibLime servers or whether or not LibLime should or should not host download.koha.org. [...]
Well, that's a bit of a change from "though LibLime does own koha.org, we'd look for the comunity to decide what would be suitable as far as content on the community site" (Joshua Ferraro, #koha, 2008-08-23). It seems pretty clear that the community would like empowerment of the community's release managers to manage releases on download.koha.org. I guess we could hold a poll if you'd like, but why cause the koha community that pain?
Yes, I sort of agree with this. Having three 3.0.4s releases wasn't a good thing. However, what's done is done and I expect HDL will have learnt from the mistakes, so this sort of public rebuke seems painful. If this were the first time we've had these kinds of problems with releases I'd completely agree.
Please excuse my poor memory, but that comment means little to me.
Also, Chris Cormack asked about changing the homepage to link to 3.00.04, but so far we haven't heard from HDL about his intentions to roll 3.00.05 to fix the previous issues with 3.00.04 and 3.00.04_final, and to provide a single download point for this release. To avoid further user confusion I suggest we await his comments on that.
OK - HDL? (And had anyone asked you before this?) Thanks, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster and LMS developer at | software www.software.coop http://mjr.towers.org.uk | .... co IMO only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html | .... op
MJ Ray a écrit :
Also, Chris Cormack asked about changing the homepage to link to 3.00.04, but so far we haven't heard from HDL about his intentions to roll 3.00.05 to fix the previous issues with 3.00.04 and 3.00.04_final, and to provide a single download point for this release. To avoid further user confusion I suggest we await his comments on that.
OK - HDL? (And had anyone asked you before this?)
Well, noone asked me to update the home page, and as far as koha.org is concerned, and I **cannot** (don't have permissions on page to) do that. About download.koha.org, and the numbering, I was really very recently asked to increase the number rather than add a tag after the name. And I agree with that. But the fact is that since the release still counted a few problems owed to the complexity of the conflicts management and modules and scripts and templates we use, with all the bug fix patches in a really short amount of time, and testing those changes on a wide variety of system preferences. And those problems required a fix. I would have rather keep the name of the initial release and change the tag position in the tree, and replace the release tarball with the fixed one. Since I would not want a non stable version to be kept in history. The quicker the fixed version would have been up, the better it would have been. But the right I have on tags is limited. And I had been once suggested to post-fix the release number with some comment. And the access on download.koha.org I had was limited since I could only upload the version on a private place on the server and Liblime had to move the files uploaded into public directory. And that access has even been closed just after the first 3.00.04 release. If you ask about 3.00.05, I propose to set one quite soon in order to stick to the principle release early, release often. Better a release which counts a few patches, which work than a release which counts lots and does have some problems. But for now, the 3.00.04_final is the latest stable release and it would be nice if koha.org pointed to that. Thanks. -- Henri-Damien LAURENT Release Maintainer
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 6:40 PM, LAURENT Henri-Damien <henridamien.laurent@biblibre.com> wrote:
MJ Ray a écrit :
Also, Chris Cormack asked about changing the homepage to link to 3.00.04, but so far we haven't heard from HDL about his intentions to roll 3.00.05 to fix the previous issues with 3.00.04 and 3.00.04_final, and to provide a single download point for this release. To avoid further user confusion I suggest we await his comments on that.
OK - HDL? (And had anyone asked you before this?)
Well, noone asked me to update the home page, and as far as koha.org is concerned, and I **cannot** (don't have permissions on page to) do that. About download.koha.org, and the numbering, I was really very recently asked to increase the number rather than add a tag after the name. And I agree with that. But the fact is that since the release still counted a few problems owed to the complexity of the conflicts management and modules and scripts and templates we use, with all the bug fix patches in a really short amount of time, and testing those changes on a wide variety of system preferences. And those problems required a fix. Why did you publish and publicly announce a release that hadn't been tested?
Your excuse for why this release is/was so buggy reinforces the fact that good release management/maintenance needs to focus on producing _quality_ releases and that this idea of 'release often release early' is NOT the appropriate strategy if the software is broken. If a release is going to be complex, please roll alpha/beta versions of it so that it can be tested, as we did with 3.00.00. You've put independent libraries running 3.0 and solutions like LibLime's Koha Express, in an awkward position because we know that 3.00.04 and 3.00.04_final are not really stable, production-ready releases. For the record, its not the first time since the 3.00.00 release that this has happened. We need some assurance from you that this won't happen again!
I would have rather keep the name of the initial release and change the tag position in the tree, and replace the release tarball with the fixed one. Since I would not want a non stable version to be kept in history. The quicker the fixed version would have been up, the better it would have been. But the right I have on tags is limited. And I had been once suggested to post-fix the release number with some comment. And the access on download.koha.org I had was limited since I could only upload the version on a private place on the server and Liblime had to move the files uploaded into public directory. And that access has even been closed just after the first 3.00.04 release.
If you ask about 3.00.05, I propose to set one quite soon in order to stick to the principle release early, release often. Better a release which counts a few patches, which work than a release which counts lots and does have some problems.
But for now, the 3.00.04_final is the latest stable release and it would be nice if koha.org pointed to that. We've adjusted the front page to point to the _final release since it is less buggy than the original 3.00.04 release you produced. However, just for the record, LibLime's community solutions such as the Koha Express platform are going to skip this release for its bugs and hold off until 3.00.05 to see if they are resolved.
Cheers, Josh
Thanks. -- Henri-Damien LAURENT Release Maintainer
-- Joshua Ferraro SUPPORT FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE CEO migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@liblime.com |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS
Hi Joshua Good to hear from you again, it's been a while. 2009/10/28 Joshua Ferraro <jmf@liblime.com>:
Hi Henri-Damien, Every time you roll a release and announce it there should be a version incremented, even if the change was a minor one to correct an error in your previous distribution. This is the generally accepted procedure for release management/maintenance.
I'm sure Henri Damien will take your advice in the manner you intended it, but the truth is he is the elected Release Maintainer and he is the one who decides what a release is numbered.
To date, LibLime haven't been editorializing your files at all, just adding and removing files as requested. The primary reason for this is that your signatures on the release will be invalid if we change the filename.
That is precisely why people sign things, so third parties don't modify them. I would hope the reason you haven't been editorialising them is because Henri Damien is the elected release maintainer and making releases is what he has been elected to do.
Therefore, we haven't changed 3.00.04_final to 3.00.04. We have left both of those files up on download.koha.org because both of them were announced as part of the project's history and download.koha.org is an archived history of releases to date. You need to send us a new distribution package complete with matching MD5, .asc, and .sig files, all with the correct file name. Please call the new one 3.00.05 rather than 3.00.04_final (or some derivation thereof) and adjust the version string as appropriate in the kohaversion.pl and updatedatabase.pl. In the future please do not send a public announcement to the Koha lists that a release is available until you have confirmed that the file has been uploaded to download.koha.org and is actually available. This will alleviate much of the confusion caused by this last announcement.
If Liblime are unable to provide access for the 2 people elected to provide releases of Koha, then perhaps they could change the dns to point download.koha.org elsewhere where that can be done. If you are willing I can provide an ip number for that.
Note that writing to one of the lists, petitioning for "some LibLimer" to respond is not as effective at getting our attention as is writing us directly as you have done in the past.
While you are there, could you or someone at Liblime change the home page of www.koha.org to to reflect that 3.0.4 is now the current stable release. Thanks Chris
participants (5)
-
Chris Cormack -
Joshua Ferraro -
LAURENT Henri-Damien -
MJ Ray -
Owen Leonard