Re: Questions...
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 09:19:45AM -0700, John Oliver wrote: > 1) Is this project the 'jabberd' that's available in EPEL? I can answer that one. jabberd in EPEL is jabberd2. As it is EPEL it will not see as many updates as the upstream package Adrian
Re: Questions...
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:49:30AM +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote: > On 2016-04-14, 06:27 GMT, Adrian Reber wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 09:19:45AM -0700, John Oliver wrote: > >> 1) Is this project the 'jabberd' that's available in EPEL? > > > > I can answer that one. jabberd in EPEL is jabberd2. As it is EPEL it > > will not see as many updates as the upstream package > > I agree that I would keep EPEL-6 (or even EPEL-5) untouched just > with possible security patches, but it seems to me that rebase > in EPEL-7 would not be the worst idea. What do you think? I am > willing to help with patching. > > Do we know what is the upgrade story? Does the latest jabberd2 > just takes over the original configuration? In the configuration I am running jabberd2 on Fedora I did not have many (maybe any) upgrading the last few versions. EPEL-7 would be an upgrade from 2.3.2 to 2.3.6. It probably depends on the installation and which backends are used if the upgrade. Looking at https://github.com/jabberd2/jabberd2/blob/master/NEWS it seems upgrading from 2.3.4 to 2.3.5 can require database changes. Not sure how to handle this. But we can try. Adrian
Re: Questions...
On 2016-04-14, 06:27 GMT, Adrian Reber wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 09:19:45AM -0700, John Oliver wrote: >> 1) Is this project the 'jabberd' that's available in EPEL? > > I can answer that one. jabberd in EPEL is jabberd2. As it is EPEL it > will not see as many updates as the upstream package I agree that I would keep EPEL-6 (or even EPEL-5) untouched just with possible security patches, but it seems to me that rebase in EPEL-7 would not be the worst idea. What do you think? I am willing to help with patching. Do we know what is the upgrade story? Does the latest jabberd2 just takes over the original configuration? Best, Matěj -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mc...@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC SCSI is *not* magic. There are *fundamental* *technical* reasons why you have to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain every now and then. -- John F. Woods
Re: Questions...
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote: > On 2016-04-14, 10:26 GMT, Adrian Reber wrote: > > In the configuration I am running jabberd2 on Fedora I did not > > have many (maybe any) upgrading the last few versions. EPEL-7 > > would be an upgrade from 2.3.2 to 2.3.6. It probably depends > > on the installation and which backends are used if the > > upgrade. Looking at > > > > https://github.com/jabberd2/jabberd2/blob/master/NEWS > > > > it seems upgrading from 2.3.4 to 2.3.5 can require database > > changes. Not sure how to handle this. But we can try. > > # mod_verify requires CREATE TABLE "verify" in DB. Make sure > # you created it before enabling the module in sm.xml. > > However, the mod_verify is new in 2.3.5, so we don't have to > care about its migration, right? Or what am I missing? Ah, now that you say so. I never read it that way. But true. Then it is probably not more than a 'git merge master' to get the latest jabberd2 on EPEL-7. If you want you can update it for EPEL-7. Adrian
