You guys need to econimize on your mail signatures... On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > On 16-Oct-2014, at 6:57 pm, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The trick part is that it is a hot upgrade. A helper table especially > for > > sysvm upgrades could do the trick. This could be a generic upgrade > function > > for anytoany version: check the table - if non processed entries update > the > > sysvm templates - mark the entries as processed. A process that would run > > on any upgrade. We could add a check in the Upgradextoy to ensure if > sysvm > > upgrade are needed that entries are added. > > > > sorry if I cut corners in my rant. I don't think this will be in 4.4.1 > > If we go with this, then in case anyone wants to upgrade from 4.3.1 to say > 4.5.0; they would require to upload a 4.4.0 template so that the upgrade > path 440to441 won’t break for them. This would be unnecessary for such an > upgrade in future from any version before 4.4.1 to any version after it. If > possible if we should fix this. > I don't think an upgrade from 4.4.0 or earlier should have to pass along 4.4.1. We can change that path. This solution isn't structural of course. Sorry I don’t have a concrete solution as I don’ t know why we are > upgrading systemvm template in the db upgrade path (any background/context > would be great). Thanks. > Me neither. My take is that it due to lack of an api command to do so.
