Hi Olemis,
I believe there were two 'database' upgrades - one of these is
associated with changing where attachment files are stored while the
other is to migrate svn modules from trac.versioncontrol.* to
tracopt.versioncontrol.svn.*
The changes to attachments location may have implications for migration
tools if they simply move files to an expected location. It might be
safer to attempt to get Bloodhound to put attachments in the correct
locations instead.
Cheers,
Gary
On 17/10/12 07:19, Olemis Lang wrote:
JFTR ... environment upgrade needed . Is it a big deal ?
On 10/16/12, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
That was just updating the copy in vendor/trac/current - I have
subsequently tagged that version appropriately and merged the changes
into trunk/trac which keeps our patches.
There is only one error that I have noted for which I believe I have
already found a fix. I will commit that in a second and I will update
the list with the commit email for review.
Cheers,
Gary
On 16/10/12 17:25, Olemis Lang wrote:
I think it's the right way to go ... however , our patches have been
applied in our copy of trac @ trunk ? ... or is it still the previous
one ?
On 10/16/12, Apache Bloodhound <[email protected]>
wrote:
#159: Incorporate Trac 1.0 into vendor branch
------------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: olemis | Owner: gjm
Type: task | Status: accepted
Priority: critical | Milestone: Release 3
Component: trac core | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords: vendor
------------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by gjm):fixed
r1398858 updates vendor/current to trac 1.0 tag (trac:r11307)
--
Ticket URL: <https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/159#comment:3>
Apache Bloodhound <https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/>
The Apache Bloodhound (incubating) issue tracker
--
Gary Martin
[email protected]
[email protected]
