I know. I am just saying our community is growing, and it will be soon
when there are enough of us who are willing to test a release before
it is marked as stable.

I have already started working on my update script on the server...

#update.sh
#!/bin/bash

# first SSH into the machine,
# then run the following commands
cd ~/web2py
hg pull
hg update -r RELEASE

Now I can update all of my web2py instances with one command ! Such
geek pleasures are priceless.


p.s. not that I would want to update ALL of them at the same time,
each needs its own amount of testing after an upgrade.

--
Thadeus





On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:03 PM, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote:
> We have had nightly builds for long time but people do not check them.
> More precisely very few people check them and therefore bugs are not
> caught.
> The bugs that caused the problems in 1.77.1,2 were not introduced the
> night before but weeks before.
> Most people only download stable releases.
>
> Massimo
>
> On Apr 21, 7:49 pm, Thadeus Burgess <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I like Yarko's proposal of R- as it will stay in line with B- B2-, RC- etc 
>> etc.
>>
>> Hopefully we can get to a point we start having release candidates
>> instead of jumping 4 versions because of simple bugfixes :) (I'm
>> staring at you 1.77.1-4)
>>
>> --
>> Thadeus
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Álvaro Justen [Turicas]
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 16:58, Yarko Tymciurak
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> RE:  using R-  as a prefix to release number (especially if adding
>> >> "RELEASE" as a tag that always points to the LATEST RELEASE):
>>
>> >> Note that the "RELEASE" tag will move: it essentially will be re-
>> >> tagging at each release.
>>
>> >> As relases move along, having a "R-"  prefix will leave past releases
>> >> marked conspicuously.  If ONLY  releases will be tagged, this might be
>> >> superfluous - BUT is patches, or test posts are (at any point in the
>> >> future) tagged, then a way to clearly, unambiguously be able to find
>> >> Release tags will be important.   There may be other ways to approach
>> >> this, but this is common, simple, allows tagging a release as beta,
>> >> release candidate, and (potentially) release, without the need to add
>> >> any revisions, for example:
>>
>> >> B2-1.99.99,   RC-1.99.99, and R-1.99.99   might all be different
>> >> changesets - OR the same changeset that passed all these gates.
>>
>> >> The discussion of a tag format of the form:  [Release state]-[Release
>> >> number]   is useful.   It should not be mixed up with discussion of
>> >> having ONE tag which always marks the latest release - these are
>> >> separate concerns.
>>
>> > I think we should use just the release number as the tag for release
>> > versions. If we are talking about a bugfix ou release candidate (that
>> > are in a lowest number compared to releases), so we can use
>> > number-bugfix or number-RC.
>> > The "default" approach to tag versions is to tag releases so, please,
>> > don't put this ugly "R-" before the version number - it is intuitive
>> > and more simple. But the exceptions (anything that isn't a release,
>> > like RC and bugfixes) should be explicitly tagged.
>> > We need to use more of the KISS philosophy.
>>
>> >> Hope that helps clarify.
>> >> Regards,
>> >> - Yarko
>>
>> >> On Apr 20, 11:27 am, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> This is easier than I thought. Thanks to yarko for insisting about
>> >>> this. Please make sure I do it properly.
>>
>> >>> On Apr 20, 10:27 am, Thadeus Burgess <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >>> > You mean, I will finally have a way to run stable versions of web2py
>> >>> > but easily update them !? w00t!
>>
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Thadeus
>>
>> >>> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Yarko Tymciurak
>>
>> >>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> > > heckings, so you can ALWAYS get the latest release from Goog
>>
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Subscription 
>> >>> > settings:http://groups.google.com/group/web2py/subscribe?hl=en
>>
>> > --
>> > Álvaro Justen - Turicas
>> >  http://blog.justen.eng.br/
>> >  21 9898-0141
>

Reply via email to