Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

I totally agree with Jonathan Lundell, I think the changes he proposes, would provide stability web2py, and I'm sure will appeal to users (both new and existing). My humble opinion is that the way they attack the bugs, is one of the weaknesses ofweb2py, I think it is messy and I'm sure many have

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

In other words, you want commit access to the master repository? On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:15 PM, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > Also an issue when only one person has access to said clones. > > -- > Thadeus > > > > > On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:04 AM, mdipierro wrote: >> >> Yarko created it and used

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Also an issue when only one person has access to said clones. -- Thadeus On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:04 AM, mdipierro wrote: > Yarko created it and used to maintain it. That is is the problem with > having too many clones in different places. Venetually they get out of > sync. > > Massimo > >

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Is there a web2py clone in bitbucket (updated 16 months ago) https://bitbucket.org/mdipierro/web2py/overview Just needs to update this repository 2010/12/27 R. Strusberg > +1 > > 2010/12/24 ron_m : > > I for one am happy with the current release

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

+1 2010/12/24 ron_m : > I for one am happy with the current release cycle. It is a good balance > between new features and the ultimate stability of release 1.XX.N  where N > is the last version before XX+1 for example. The nightly build is a bit of a > misnomer, many projects (C or C++ mostly) ha

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

+1 to bitbucket. Bitbucket is great!, If we can clone in bitbucket, also if we can separate welcome/ and admin/ as independant app, we can contribute more to the web2py. 2010/12/24 Branko Vukelić : > 2010/12/24 Kenneth Lundström : >> Is there instructions how to use the hg stuff to use the trunk.

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 4:08 PM, weheh wrote: > I'm not keen on the 2 button approach -- can you imagine a 2 button > release for python? Nevertheless, it does potentially simplify the Yes, I can certainly imagine a 2 button Python release[1]: -- For the MD5 checksu

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

+1 for a changelog view. The idea behind a two button upgrade is just as Branco explained, on my production instance I´d only upgrade to stable but on my development I´d upgrade to newest release just for helping out with testing. This way maybe not everyone upgrades their production server t

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 10:18 PM, VP wrote: > For one thing, I don't think the 2-button suggestion is a good idea; > it's just another indirect layer of information that might not be > meaningful if the underlying mechanism is meaningful.  Conversely, if > the underlying mechanism is meaningful, t

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

2010/12/24 Kenneth Lundström : > Is there instructions how to use the hg stuff to use the trunk. Could not > find the hg command in the book? Look here: http://code.google.com/p/web2py/source/checkout I think the double-update button is a good idea. I was going to suggest/implement the same thin

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Merry christmas to the whole list. I think this has been suggested earlier but thought I´d bring it up again. I have two instances of web2py via wsgi and Apache running on my server. One reason is the possibility to upgrade my development side everytime I log in to admin, that way getting all

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

+1 On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Luis Díaz wrote: > +1 > > 2010/12/24 ron_m >> >> I for one am happy with the current release cycle. It is a good balance >> between new features and the ultimate stability of release 1.XX.N  where N >> is the last version before XX+1 for example. The nightly b

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

+1 2010/12/24 ron_m > I for one am happy with the current release cycle. It is a good balance > between new features and the ultimate stability of release 1.XX.N where N > is the last version before XX+1 for example. The nightly build is a bit of a > misnomer, many projects (C or C++ mostly) ha

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Good. Now this thread can go into the list of many archived threads about this topic. Nothing will happen and things will continue as they have been, which isn't so bad because nobody is forcing you to upgrade your web2py version each time a new release comes out. However, Branko, part of the pro

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Kinda of joking, but also kinda serious. It cost time and money to have to test something just because a decision was made to upgrade the library (in this case, web2py). -- Thadeus 2010/12/23 Branko Vukelić > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Thadeus Burgess > wrote: > > Seriously: no. > >

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote: > I suspect that we're talking at cross purposes. I have nothing more to say in this ridiculous thread. -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 23, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Branko Vukelić wrote: > > You keep babbling about your selfish needs, not even considering that > there are actual people who have THEIR OWN needs and yet make time to > listen to you, and implement shit in record time. And again, it has to > be said, that saves you yo

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:40 PM, pbreit wrote: > Part of the value of a framework is being able to count on its stability. > For now, we can upgrade more slowly and pay attention to stability reports > of new releases. Yes, yes. Sit around and wait. For what reports again? Based on what bug repo

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

I think it's definitely a worthwhile goal to evolve the release schedule into stable and feature branches with bugs getting back-ported but suspect it will take some time to get there. Part of the value of a framework is being able to count on its stability. For now, we can upgrade more slowly

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > Seriously: no. > > I have way to many new features to add to the site and too little time to > worry about testing each time I upgrade. I really hope you're just joking, and I'm just too stupid to get the funny part. :P -- Branko Vukeli

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Seriously: no. I have way to many new features to add to the site and too little time to worry about testing each time I upgrade. -- Thadeus On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote: > On Dec 23, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Branko Vukelić wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 6:19 PM,

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 23, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Branko Vukelić wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote: >> Seriously: no. > > Seriously: yes. Why? Because it's YOUR work that is going to suffer if > you don't. Why WOULDN'T you test something you are going to deploy? > I've just tested do

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote: > Seriously: no. Seriously: yes. Why? Because it's YOUR work that is going to suffer if you don't. Why WOULDN'T you test something you are going to deploy? I've just tested dozen frameworks and even PHP before starting a project, and I'm a

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 23, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Branko Vukelić wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote: >> On Dec 23, 2010, at 1:04 AM, cjrh wrote: >>> >>> On Dec 22, 6:05 pm, Thadeus Burgess wrote: What I do is if my app works with a certain version, I don't ever upgrade the

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote: > On Dec 23, 2010, at 1:04 AM, cjrh wrote: >> >> On Dec 22, 6:05 pm, Thadeus Burgess wrote: >>> What I do is if my app works with a certain version, I don't ever upgrade >>> the web2py unless I need a brand new feature or bugfix that effect

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 23, 2010, at 1:04 AM, cjrh wrote: > > On Dec 22, 6:05 pm, Thadeus Burgess wrote: >> What I do is if my app works with a certain version, I don't ever upgrade >> the web2py unless I need a brand new feature or bugfix that effects me. > > +1. If you don't need anything new, no point in upg

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 22, 2010, at 8:01 PM, Luther Goh Lu Feng wrote: > > To clarify, what I am saying is, no change to current release system, > except to label stable and testing branches. It's a little like the > branches of Debian Linux > http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Debian#Stable.2C_Testing.2C_Unsta

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

agreed. Less overhead to releases means new features get added faster.

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Shoot Massimo an e-mail. I'm sure he'd be happy to hear from you. On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Michael McGinnis wrote: > I'd like to help fix those typos. Let me know how I can get started. > > Michael McGinnis > michael.d.mcgin...@gmail.com > > On Dec 22, 4:01 pm, Stefaan Himpe wrote: >> >

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Michele Comitini wrote: > Web2py supports unit testing.  Why not have an app with controller(s) > that can be tested for each solved bug? >  this would reduce at least regressions.  Kinda continuos integration system That also requires time and discipline, if I'm

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Web2py supports unit testing. Why not have an app with controller(s) that can be tested for each solved bug? this would reduce at least regressions. Kinda continuos integration system 2010/12/22 Jonathan Lundell : > On Dec 22, 2010, at 11:42 AM, mdipierro wrote: >> >> We can change the name. It

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 22, 2010, at 11:42 AM, mdipierro wrote: > > We can change the name. It is not truly a nigthly built. it is closer > to a release candidate even if the final release is not equivalent to > the latest nightly built. I'm sounding like a broken record here (remember those?), but in view of the

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Please, don't encourage me. :D On Wednesday, December 22, 2010 3:13:32 PM UTC-5, stu...@brankovukelic.com wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Anthony wrote: > > Oh, also, I noticed a typo on the website -- it says "Nightly Built" > instead > > of "Nightly Build". Maybe that's the problem

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Anthony wrote: > Oh, also, I noticed a typo on the website -- it says "Nightly Built" instead > of "Nightly Build". Maybe that's the problem. ;-) Is there a typo on this planet that can evade Anthony? :D -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.br

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Oh, also, I noticed a typo on the website -- it says "Nightly Built" instead of "Nightly Build". Maybe that's the problem. ;-)

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Also, you probably need some kind of announcement to prompt testing -- there's nothing prompting people to check the nightly build (or even to know when anything substantial has been added to it). When a new .1 release (e.g., 1.91.1) is announced (usually with a list of new features), that prom

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

that means we prefer a stable one :)

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:29 PM, mdipierro wrote: > The idea was to have stable and nightly-build. The problem is that > very few people check the nightly build. Well, yeah, it's because it's sounds like a nightly TRUNK dump. :) It's better to make a 'incubation release' or something like that, s

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

I see the need to organize a test team Some ideas: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/LoCoTeam http://ubuntutesting.wordpress.com/2010/08/06/desktop-testing-team/ https://launchpad.net/~desktop-testing-team Or, we can organizze Local S

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > The latter. > > No time to test aside from upgrading in production. Oh, but that's a bit upside down. web2py comes with no warranties, you should at least test it a bit before going live. And as a double-win, you also help judging the qual

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 22, 2010, at 9:17 AM, pbreit wrote: > I do think at some point the concept of "stable" and "new" will be useful for > newer users. "stable" might be a loaded word so maybe just "recommended" or > something. One challenge will be how to process bug fixes on "stable". A > start may be the a

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

I do think at some point the concept of "stable" and "new" will be useful for newer users. "stable" might be a loaded word so maybe just "recommended" or something. One challenge will be how to process bug fixes on "stable". A start may be the ability to specify a branch in admin. And new users

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Dec 22, 2010, at 7:47 AM, Branko Vukelić wrote: > > 2010/12/22 Luis Díaz : >> >> in particular whenever new versions come out ... I always say ... have >> to wait 1 week or 2 to becomestable ... > > Not "become stable", but "be proven stable". You release, wait for > everyone to give it a go.

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

The latter. No time to test aside from upgrading in production. No time to develop a test application which can handle all of web2py features (including all DAL databases) No time to set up and maintain a server just for said tests. -- Thadeus 2010/12/22 Branko Vukelić > On Wed, Dec 22, 2

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > Nobody has time to work on certain things like this since most of us have > full time jobs that may or may not be related to web2py. What do you mean? No time to develop a system of labeling releases or no time to upgrade, test, etc? --

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

Funny, Every three to four weeks this topic of discussion comes up. Lots of the same ideas are said over and over again. Nobody has time to work on certain things like this since most of us have full time jobs that may or may not be related to web2py. What I do is if my app works with a certain

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

2010/12/22 Luis Díaz : > > in particular whenever new versions come out ... I always say ... have > to wait 1 week or 2 to becomestable ... Not "become stable", but "be proven stable". You release, wait for everyone to give it a go. If everyone is happy, then it's considered stable, and move to st

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

in particular whenever new versions come out ... I always say ... have to wait 1 week or 2 to becomestable ... unless the new features are highly anticipated and then one is dedicated to testing the system 2010/12/22 KR > I support that. > For me the last stable is 1.89.5 (or maybe 1.90.6 ? if

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Michele Comitini wrote: > should we have a stable and beta (latest) release?  Many people do not > use trunk, because changes too fast I guess. > Having a beta period before stable could help attract more beta > testers, but I think it would add a burden for versio

Re: [web2py] Re: The stability of web2py releases

should we have a stable and beta (latest) release? Many people do not use trunk, because changes too fast I guess. Having a beta period before stable could help attract more beta testers, but I think it would add a burden for version control... mic 2010/12/22 ron_m : > If you are sensitive to n