[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Action/Triggers
I have been trying to get some notifications running to do some tests on stuff and nothing seems to be happening. We don't currently have this on a cron tab and I was just trying to run it manually on the command line */openils/bin/action_trigger_runner.pl --process-hooks --run-pending*. based on the documentation here ( http://docs.evergreen-ils.org/2.0/draft/html/ProcessingActionTriggers.html) I get no errors but no notifications run. We are also doing some testing of EDI with Ingram and the PO doesn't load to Ingram although we have successfully imported a selection list and order information from Ingram. We have not created any new actions/triggers and everything is on the default from the 2.1 beta install. The following are enabled: - 7 day overdue email notification (we have titles that should have generated this notification) - claim voucher - holds pull list - invoice - item recall email notice - line item worksheet - PO HTML - PO JEDI - and others -- Tim Spindler Manager of Library Applications tspind...@cwmars.org 508-755-3323 x20 IM: tjspindler (AOL, meebo, google wave) C/W MARS, Inc. 67 Millbrook St, Suite 201 Worcester, MA 01606 http://www.cwmars.org *P** Go Green - **Save a tree! Please don't print this e-mail unless it's really necessary.*
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Action/Triggers
Hi Tim, Part 1 - Action/Trigger cron jobs... For our case, our cron entries looks more like this: # Nightly action/trigger passive hook event generator 0 3 * * * cd /openils/bin /usr/bin/perl ./action_trigger_runner.pl --osrf-config /openils/conf/opensrf_core.xml --process-hooks # Run pending A/T events. 0,15,30,45 * * * * cd /openils/bin /usr/bin/perl ./action_trigger_runner.pl --osrf-config /openils/conf/opensrf_core.xml --run-pending While not necessary to follow this exact style (I think we're doing it differently than say the default crontab.example that ships with Evergreen), I think it does matter to use the --osrf-config option with the action_trigger_runner.pl script. We split up the --process-hooks and --run-pending options because we only planned to process passive events nightly vs. running the pending much more often (once every 15 minutes currently). Part 2 - EDI and Acq... We were just testing EDI yesterday (got great advice from Galen Charlton via IRC) and we were finally able to send .EPO files to Ingram's FTP site by day's end. It involved setting up the edi_pusher.pl script and running it after we had finished A/T processing. The edi_pusher.pl and edi_fetcher.pl scripts should be in the Open-ILS/src/support-scripts/ directory and we copied them to /openils/bin for easy access. It was also necessary to setup and start the edi_translator pieces. For that, you turn to the files in the directory Open-ILS/src/edi_translator. In that directory, there's an install script that will install the necessary prerequisites for something called webrick(?). The script says it was written for Debian Lenny, but we've tested it successfully with Ubuntu Lucid (our OS). We copied that whole directory to /openils/bin (though you could put it anywhere really), installed the prereqs with the install script, and then started up the program by calling the edi_webrick.bash script in that directory. Hopefully we can work out some sort of installation guide (if one doesn't already exist) and that can be added to the 2.0+ Documentation. We may contact you later about importing a selection list / order information from Ingram, though I'm unsure if our catalogers have already pieced that together or not. -- Ben On 06/22/2011 08:15 AM, Tim Spindler wrote: I have been trying to get some notifications running to do some tests on stuff and nothing seems to be happening. We don't currently have this on a cron tab and I was just trying to run it manually on the command line */openils/bin/action_trigger_runner.pl http://action_trigger_runner.pl |--process-hooks| |--run-pending|*. based on the documentation here (http://docs.evergreen-ils.org/2.0/draft/html/ProcessingActionTriggers.html) I get no errors but no notifications run. We are also doing some testing of EDI with Ingram and the PO doesn't load to Ingram although we have successfully imported a selection list and order information from Ingram. We have not created any new actions/triggers and everything is on the default from the 2.1 beta install. The following are enabled: * 7 day overdue email notification (we have titles that should have generated this notification) * claim voucher * holds pull list * invoice * item recall email notice * line item worksheet * PO HTML * PO JEDI * and others -- Tim Spindler Manager of Library Applications tspind...@cwmars.org mailto:tspind...@cwmars.org 508-755-3323 x20 IM: tjspindler (AOL, meebo, google wave) C/W MARS, Inc. 67 Millbrook St, Suite 201 Worcester, MA 01606 http://www.cwmars.org http://www.cwmars.org/ *P** Go Green - **Save a tree! Please don't print this e-mail unless it's really necessary.* -- Benjamin Shum Open Source Software Coordinator Bibliomation, Inc. 32 Crest Road Middlebury, CT 06762 203-577-4070, ext. 113
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Testing and Evergreen's quality (was: Database schema deprecation/supersedes stuff)
Top-posting because my response (or, more appropriately, follow-up) is in the form of a public google doc. Short version: We agree on all the goals, so I propose a way forward that leverages the size (bigger than pre-2.0 and growing) of our community and IMO gives us the tools to enact change toward those shared goals. Long version: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EyLZ9PH25kwQvbC9uvYo0z8cYG5Ui3bFrzlkp2C2FYA/edit?hl=en_US Thanks, Dan, for clearly articulating your thoughts. I hope the doc above does the same. All, please, PLEASE take a few minutes to read that. Feedback strongly encouraged, both general and specific. If this thread grows a lot I'll happily open that doc for editing. --miker On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Dan Scott d...@coffeecode.net wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Mike Rylander mrylan...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Dan Scott d...@coffeecode.net wrote: * Are we ready to start making use of pgTAP? Changing the database schema seems like a perfect use case for unit tests, to ensure that expected behaviour is maintained through the upgrade, and to demonstrate that buggy behaviour is fixed or non-existent behaviour comes into existence via the upgrade. Ready? Sure. Tuit-ful? Not I... I'm not sure how to respond to this tactfully, so I won't try to be clever or cute, I'll just be blunt. The alternative to putting in time upfront on quality is to spend more time addressing quality problems later after a release, and we've done a lot of the latter. We've had trouble publishing high quality initial releases. Production sites have been finding too many problems with their patrons and staff, and it's not good for the Evergreen name. My hands are far from clean on this front (hello, sites who upgraded from 1.6 - 2.0 and ran into problems with authorities), which is one of the reasons that I have invested much of my own time in getting the continuous integration server running again and creating a skeleton set of unit tests (and thanks to Kevin for his efforts in that area too). It's also why I've been a proponent of getting sign-off on branches from another contributor instead of committing your own work directly to a core branch. I believe that we can begin to address some of these quality issues via more unit test coverage. I don't think that we're going to get very far, though, if we just have one or two people trying to add unit tests to other people's work - and those people are likely to have their own areas of new functionality that they want to contribute to Evergreen, rather than spending all of their time writing tests for other people's code. The people creating new functionality or modifying existing functionality are the ones who are in the best position of knowing what inputs and outputs to expect from a given chunk of code, and therefore to create basic unit tests demonstrating those expectations - which helps other contributors weeks, months, or years later know whether their own changes will break expectations. But we need to adopt the approach as a team, not as individuals. Tackling the database schema via pgTAP as modifications happen seems like a small, reasonable step to take in this direction. It's not trying to boil the ocean by saying that we need unit tests for every function and every table in the database immediately; it's suggesting that, when you modify the schema, you commit tests at the same time that demonstrate that your changes do what you say they do (and maintain existing behaviour). And eventually, I bet we would get a lot of the database schema covered with this gradual approach. Unit tests alone won't prevent all of the problems that we've run into with new releases, of course. I've been guilty of introducing new functionality that proved to perform poorly at scale until indexes were added, or that only showed up when data was migrated from a previous release rather than loaded directly into the new release. Bug #788379 (broad searches are slow) is an example of a serious performance regression in 2.0 that has yet to be addressed. constrictor gives us some great tools on the performance testing front, but it takes time to set up a clean environment loaded up with sufficient data to trigger noticeable performance problems (let alone tracking performance over time) or to run that environment through an upgrade process and put the resulting environment through its paces. We need repeatable upgrade tests and performance tests - maybe a community environment that runs a standard set of system tests on a regular basis and tracks those results over time? In summary, I don't think I'm the only person who feels that we've had quality problems. There are probably ways to address these problems that I haven't raised here, and I'd be happy to hear about alternatives from people who are prepared to adopt them. I just don't want to see a 2.1.0 release that isn't
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Windows Client Version?
I wanted to add this info to this thread. It was from Brian Feifarek who is maintaining one of the demo servers. He said: Your problem is that 2.0 Beta 4 is a different version than 2.0.4. You can get a copy of the Beta 4 client from here: Staff Client 2.0 Beta 4https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BzQXgF79e0mNNjcxZDczOGMtZGJkMy00YmFhLTlhOGQtMDMxMjVlYzZjZWZhhl=en_US Or you could upgrade your server from the beta to the current version, which would make sense because they have been fixing lots of bugs and adding enhanced functionality. Lori =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Lori Bowen Ayre // Library Technology Consultant The Galecia Group // www.galecia.com (707) 763-6869 // lori.a...@galecia.com lori.a...@galecia.comSpecializing in open source ILS solutions, RFID, filtering, workflow optimization, and materials handling =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley lebbe...@esilibrary.com wrote: On 06/21/2011 02:57 PM, Boggs, John wrote: Hi all, I'm trying to log into my test server, running 2.0 Beta 4, for the first time in a while, and I keep getting the error This server does not support your version of the staff client. Please check with your system administrator. The client also shows 404: Not Found on the line labeled Server. I am running client version 2.0.4 - is this not right, or might there be something else going on on the server side? Hi John, I'm afraid 2.0 beta 4 and 2.0.4 are not the same thing. 2.0.4 is the fourth point release after the official 2.0 release (2.0.0). The beta versions are preview/testing releases that came out before the official 2.0 release. I don't see beta staff clients on the official website anymore, but somebody else on the list might have your version available if you no longer have a copy handy. -- Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley | Software Developer | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: lebbe...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com Equinox is going to New Orleans! Please visit us at booth 550 at ALA Annual to learn more about Koha and Evergreen.
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen 2.1 has been released!
Evergreen 2.1 was released on June 18th and can be downloaded here: http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads.php Evergreen 2.1 contains lots of enhancements including: -Staff Client enhancements, like unlimited tabs and dynamic hot keys -Important bug fixes -General command line import/export improvements -Serials improvements -Circulation enhancements, like in-database grace intervals -Catalog enhancements, like indexing and authorities improvements -Performance enhancements, like search performance tuning options The arrival of Evergreen 2.1 is welcome news to the community! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Amy Terlaga Assistant Director, User Services Bibliomation, Inc. 32 Crest Road Middlebury, CT 06762 http://www.biblio.org www.biblio.org
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen 2.1 - CORRECTION
Sorry all- I mistakenly prematurely announced the release of Evergreen 2.1. It's release candidate 1, not officially released. My sincere apologies for jumping the gun. To learn more about this release candidate, you can still go to: http://evergreen-ils.org/downloads.php +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Amy Terlaga Assistant Director, User Services Bibliomation, Inc. 32 Crest Road Middlebury, CT 06762 http://www.biblio.org www.biblio.org
