Hi all, I just wanted to give a quick status update on my progress with getting the live issue tracker and wiki back online.
I have managed to use the existing vagrant/salt files to provision a vm with the 0.4 version installed. I have also got a fix for the issue where apache was unable to serve bloodhound. I have managed to use the existing backup of the live site to restore the database. However because the live site wasn't a standard 0.4 installation, I think it was still using trac 0.13dev for some reason, I was unable to just restore the ticket attachments. So rather than waste time investigating this I just went through and reattached the files manually. So I now have a working version of the live site at version 0.4 with ticket attachments. What I don't have in my backup is the wiki attachments. So unless anyone else has a backup of them I would have to get INFRA to restart the old VM. I am reluctant to do this unless I really have to. What I have planned next are: - Create new backup from 0.4 using trac-admin hotcopy which will clean and restore the database. - Test that I can consistently rebuild with just vagrant/salt and backup file. - Build new 0.8 vm using vagrant/salt. - Restore from my 0.4 backup. - Upgrade if necessary. - Test everything is working. - Create new backup for version 0.8 - Test that I can consistently rebuild this version with just vagrant/salt and backup file. - Commit my changes to the vagrant/salt files to trunk and publish my restore instructions here, also commit my live 0.8 backup file to the private svn repository. The next stage after that will be to work with INFRA to create puppet scripts to match the vagrant/salt ones we have to provision and setup the new live VM. Maybe this is work that others could look at whilst I complete the above. If someone wants to start this work let me know and I will commit my fix for the apache issue and changes to provision the live vm to trunk for you to make use of. Cheers John. On 7 November 2017 at 18:50, Dammina Sahabandu <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for deploying 0.8 release which is the latest. > > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 6:11 PM Gary <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Nov 2017, at 03:11 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: > > > Hello John > > > > > > On 11/6/17, John Chambers <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Olemis, > > > > > > > > The plan that has been discussed before was to migrate to an 0.8 > > instance. > > > > So we can make use of full multi-product support. I still think this > is > > > > possible. > > > > Having multiple instances could cause some confusion in my opinion > so I > > > > would look to avoid that if possible. > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > There is a reason why b.a.o was not upgraded to 0.8 before . That's > > > why I suggested keeping both VMs during the time 0.8 evolves to become > > > stable (which I think should be the next step, cmiiw). IMHO having a > > > stable multi-product version should be a precondition to shut down 0.4 > > > instance and release a new version (be it 0.8.x , 0.9 or ...). > > > > > > I'll also plan for bringing back to life blood-hound.net multi-product > > > instance. In the process I might get some inspiration to write a > > > Docker file . These days I only tend to deploy services in containers. > > > Nonetheless , like I just said , looking forward I'd recommend doing a > > > (major?) architectural upgrade in BH code base. > > > > > > > If we can prove that the 0.8 will work well enough, let's just use that. > > I don't think an intermediate situation where we are running two or more > > is feasible. We should be using the latest version we can and preferably > > the latest release. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > -- > Dammina Sahabandu > Associate Tech Lead, AdroitLogic > Committer, Apache Software Foundation > AMIE (SL) > Bsc Eng Hons (Moratuwa) > +94716422775 >
