On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Mads Toftum wrote: > On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 03:26:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote: > > Here's a patch to install.xml to deal with upgrading. Feedback welcome. > > > Maybe suggest that people read CHANGES first? > Can we really be sure that all upgrades will be that smooth? I know that > people try their best to make it so, but there could still be bigger > changes even in 2.0.x and definetely in 2.1.x. > Should it say something about 3rd party modules?
Referencing CHANGES is a good idea. As far as if this will work consistently, we now have made a commitment to our users that this upgrade process will work across minor versions. Major version changes are a different story. I tried to include enough conditional language to indicate that people still need to be careful, just in case something is missed. Third party modules don't need to be upgraded since the module API is fixed across minor versions. I tried to cover this by saying "all your modules will continue to work". Do I need to be more specific? Joshua. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
