Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>]

On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:32:53 -0500
David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org> wrote:
> You could simply move the files after doing the update. So that
> they're no longer managed by sorcery. Oh, wait, that's almost exactly
> what you're proposing...
> 
> There's no good way to go about doing this, except for using xen and a
> development server ;)
> 
> or virtualbox as a development server.
> 
> FWIW, I think that's the "correct" way to go about doing things. If
> you upgrade stuff on a production server without testing, it's going
> to go badly.
> 
> That's my opinion. I don't think we need to change it so that things
> aren't tracked anymore. I think that's a horrible idea. Website
> asplodage is purely an administrative mistake, IMHO, which can be
> trivially avoided with a bit of time and virtualbox (or xen).

You misunderstand, I *want* the files to still be tracked, hence using
protected, not excluded (which also didn't work ;)). You don't have to
use the spells for web apps, but for those of us that do, I want them
to work and not wipe out working installs. If I use `mv`, the files are
no longer tracked (bad) *and* it wipes out the files if you're
re-installing the same version (for some reason), which is why we use
install_www_files. Yes, you should test on a dev box, but even on that
dev box my work would have been wiped out, which isn't what we want. ;)
We want spells to be as non-destructive as possible, not like those
flashy Wizards in the movies. :p

-sandalle

-- 
Eric Sandall                     |  Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61  |  http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/          |  http://counter.li.org/  #196285

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature