Code name for 9.1.0

[pgf at laptop.org]

[ greg -- be sure fix the subject when replying to a digest. ]

greg wrote:
 > Hi Martin,
 > 
 > We need keep that capability of upgrade from anywhere to anywhere if at 
 > all possible! That is a huge benefit for our customers and for our 
 > managing the scope of testing.
 > 
 > Even if we can just keep that from any 70x forward it will be a big help.
 > 
 > I know we hope 8.2.0 is rock solid but it may not be so we need an 
 > option to downgrade safely.

downgrade is _very_ difficult to get right.  it's a worthy goal,
but given our testing resources, and the natural concentration of
both developers and testers on the upgrade scenario, i wouldn't
promise downgrade.  (and from what cscott has said to me every time
i mutter under my breath about upgrade oddness, i'm under the
impression that the "boot to previous version" is really only
a failsafe mechanism to keep the box running until your upgrade
is successful, and isn't intended as a true "downgrade".  correct
me if i'm wrong, scott.)

paul

 > 
 > BTW on this issue below, I just talked to a sugar engineer and they plan 
 > to fix that before we ship 8.2.0.
 > 
 > Thanks,
 > 
 > Greg S
 > 
 > > Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:25:17 +1200
 > > From: "Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff at gmail.com>
 > > Subject: Re: Code name for 9.1.0
 > > To: "Morgan Collett" <morgan.collett at gmail.com>
 > > Cc: richard at laptop.org, devel at lists.laptop.org
 > > Message-ID:
 > > 	<46a038f90807162125g76c3d586qd3d93b3060482f9d at mail.gmail.com>
 > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
 > > 
 > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Morgan Collett
 > > <morgan.collett at gmail.com> wrote:
 > >> With olpc-update, it's not critical to update from version x to
 > >> version x+1 - we can skip versions as we don't depend on a particular
 > >> package state. (e.g. You can upgrade from 650 to joyride without
 > >> having to upgrade to 703 first...) In the future that could become
 > >> significant though if we have system changes affecting datastore
 > >> format changes or something which might make support easier if
 > >> upgrading from a known version.
 > > 
 > > I don't think that the ability to skip versions is going to hold long term.
 > > 
 > > The current setup is that olpc-updte does away with all the post-inst
 > > and related hooks, which means that running code has to have the
 > > smarts to upgrade/downgrade stored data formats (user documents,
 > > configuration options, etc). This can get burdensome quickly.
 > > 
 > > As of now for example, the promise of olpc-update (of booting back to
 > > the older version sanely) is broken between update-703 and current
 > > joyride as the ds format has changed in an incompatible way, and
 > > update-703 cannot read the new layout.
 > > 
 > > cheers,
 > > 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > m
 > _______________________________________________
 > Devel mailing list
 > Devel at lists.laptop.org
 > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

=---------------------
 paul fox, pgf at laptop.org