[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RFC: EOL of mediawiki from EL-4, EL-5, EL-6



On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 03:33:43PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 14:27, Ray Van Dolson <rayvd bludgeon org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 01:53:32PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >> I plan to EOL mediawiki for the EPEL releases for EL-4,5,6 due to
> >> packaging newer ones using mediawiki114,mediawiki115, mediawiki116.
> >>
> >> There are several ways I can do this:
> >>
> >> 1) change mediawiki114 to replace mediawiki. Pros would allow people
> >> to keep a package on their system. COns most likely will break due to
> >> linking and changes in package.
> >>
> >> 2) put out a final mediawiki package with a "Please dont use." in
> >> README and %description.
> >>
> >> 3) just remove from system.
> >>
> >> I need input and help on getting this done.
> >>
> >> Thankyou.
> >
> > I like option #1.  Are you tracking this in a bugzilla somewhere?  I
> > would be happy to "help" insofar as testing this new package (the
> > upgrade side-effects mainly).
> 
> I have tried a couple of times to do #1. However they all ended up
> being very very delicate in that they only worked with a default
> install. As soon as I tried to make it work in a non-default way I
> ended up with broken links and a lot of hand fixing that would be
> needed either way.
> 
> At this point my best step is to parallel install mediwiki114 and
> mediawiki. Go through your config files and symbolic links and point
> to mediawiki114. Test. Repeat.

Ah.  In light of your experiences then, it sounds like the parallel
install is the way to go -- and then maybe down the road retire the
parent mediawiki package after people have had a chance to adopt
mediawiki114 and update their configurations.

> 
> The second issue is that they are not 1:1 matches. I decided not to
> implement Axil's multihome patch because upstream had no interest in
> it and they pointed out it needed a more work for it to work well (for
> their definition of well). I am a) not a PHP developer and b) full up
> on other jobs so decided to take it out and implement a minimal patch
> set to deal with upstreams packaging style.

All makes sense to me.

Do you have a bz# where you're tracking this so I could join to
collaborate on testing?  Alternately, I'll just keep an eye out for
mediawiki114 packages to show up in epel-testing.

> > .. however, I think this provides the best opportunity for a "better"
> > upgrade path.  We could document upgrade hurdles we find either on the
> > wiki or in a README.Fedora file (or both).
> >
> > Ray

Ray


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]