-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 01/10/2011 09:02 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 08:02 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> As a caveat, this is a project that always requires at least some manual
> intervention on upgrade, as individual sites need to have an upgrade
> script run on them. So end-users are used to taking some action.
> Unfortunately, upstream did not include this configuration change into
> the upgrade script (mostly because the location of this configuration
> file isn't guaranteed on all platforms) so it will require an additional
> step by the users.
>
> So what would be the correct way to approach this? I'm not sure if
> making a note about it in the updates description is sufficient (since
How about having the update script notify the admin of the required
change? Even if it can't automatically perform it, it can at least tell
you that it's required. And if every admin is accustomed to running that
script anyway, it seems the most sensible place to provide the
information.
Hmm, that's a good idea. I'll look into doing this. I misspoke when I
called it an upgrade "script" though. It's a manage.py module, so it's
a
bit complicated to add to it. But I'll see if it's feasible (and submit
the patch upstream as well)
Thanks!
- --
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk0rFPsACgkQeiVVYja6o6NZngCgqxpuUGRNNL8+3pJHA09NaQY1
Ng0An2oJEkCncIqmEp6PJbKwAV7B7zJA
=zUvg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----