Re: [Gallery3] Wrapping up 3.0.5

Meant to reply all....

Yes, I can put this in tonight once the kids are in bed.

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Bharat Mediratta <[email protected]>wrote:

>
> Good idea, Shad.  I've edited the release story to include that part.  Go
> ahead and post in the forum topics.
>
> Dariush, can you update gallerymodules.com with Shad's text?
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Shad Laws <shad-xpYdmXCiSuZWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> With the warning messages in place and the doc page written (and revised
>> - thanks, floridave!), I thought I'd take a stab at the short messages to
>> include elsewhere.
>>
>> -----
>> - Download page for v3.0.5 (e.g. http://galleryproject.org/gallery_3_0_5)
>> - Forum post for v3.0.5 (e.g.
>> http://galleryproject.org/gallery_3.0.5_feedback)
>>
>> Obsolete Modules
>>
>> Upgrades to Gallery v3.0.5 have made the following modules obsolete:
>> Digibug, NoFFmpeg, VideoDimensions, and Videos.  If you're currently
>> using these modules, we recommend that you deactivate them. For more
>> information, please see the documentation page at
>> http://codex.galleryproject.org/Gallery3:User_guide:Obsolete_modules.
>>
>> -----
>> - Forum posts for the obsolete modules
>> - Documentation pages for the obsolete modules
>>
>> Update: recent upgrades to Gallery have made this module obsolete.  If
>> you're currently using it, we recommend that you deactivate it. For more
>> information, please see the documentation page at
>> http://codex.galleryproject.org/Gallery3:User_guide:Obsolete_modules.
>>
>> -----
>> - Gallerymodules.com
>>
>> Ideally, rather than making a site-wide message, it'd be great to prepend
>> the descriptions of the modules in question to include:
>>
>> <b>(Obsolete - see documentation here)</b>
>>
>> With an href on "here" to the doc page at
>> http://codex.galleryproject.org/Gallery3:User_guide:Obsolete_modules.
>>  Dariush - would this be easy to include?
>>
>>
>> Feedback?  Other thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Shad
>>
>>
>> On 21 February 2013 12:49, Shad Laws <shad-xpYdmXCiSuZWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Now that Bharat and I have gotten the warnings pulled into the code, I
>>> took a stab at making the doc page:
>>> http://codex.galleryproject.org/Gallery3:User_guide:Obsolete_modules
>>>
>>> Thoughts?  Feel free to edit it directly if you like...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 20 February 2013 15:56, Shad Laws <shad-xpYdmXCiSuZWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> Following up on this, I made this pull request:
>>>> https://github.com/gallery/gallery3/pull/155
>>>>
>>>> It adds a warning message to admin/dashboard, admin/modules, and
>>>> upgrader.  My goal was to inform the user and let them do what they want
>>>> without annoying them (persistent site status warnings) or prohibiting them
>>>> (forcibly disallowing and/or deactivating things).
>>>>
>>>> The "obsolescence check" itself looks at the list of active modules
>>>> *and* their version numbers.  This leaves open the possibility of someone
>>>> completely overhauling a previously-obsolete module, upping the version
>>>> number, and having it work without issue.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Take care,
>>>> Shad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 20 February 2013 09:15, Shad Laws <shad-xpYdmXCiSuZWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey gang,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the feedback!  Based on that and a bit more thinking on my
>>>>> end, I *think* I have a clearer idea of how to do this.  Any and all
>>>>> feedback welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>> Motivations:
>>>>> - If we're obsoleting a bunch of modules, it'd be nice to give a
>>>>> little explanation.  At the same time, it'd be nice not to muddy up release
>>>>> announcements with a bunch of text that only affects people who use
>>>>> now-obsolete modules.
>>>>> - While this is the first occurrence of purposefully obsoleting
>>>>> modules, it may not be the last.
>>>>> - This solution should probably be applied to the digibug module, too,
>>>>> as the company no longer exists :-(.
>>>>>
>>>>> Solution:
>>>>> - Add a new doc page, for example here:
>>>>> http://codex.galleryproject.org/Gallery3:User_guide:Obsolete_modules.
>>>>>  Here we have a short intro blurb, then a stanza for each module we've
>>>>> obsoleted with a bit of explanation, alternatives, etc.  This page can grow
>>>>> in the future if necessary.
>>>>> - Add short messages that point to the doc page in: v3.0.5 download
>>>>> page, v3.0.5 forum post, gallerymodules.com, and doc pages and forum
>>>>> posts for the modules themselves.
>>>>> - Add a routine to Gallery's core that checks active modules against a
>>>>> hard-coded list to alert the admin, which is called by: upgrader,
>>>>> admin/modules, and admin/dashboard.  To keep this simple and relatively
>>>>> unobtrusive, we can skip the site message part (as Chad pointed out, it's
>>>>> not as high-impact anyway).  The hard-coded list can grow with future
>>>>> Gallery releases if necessary, too.
>>>>> - Consider setting up a mailing list to send due diligence in the
>>>>> future.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Take care,
>>>>> Shad
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> gallery-devel <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 20 February 2013 02:56, Chad Kieffer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Welcome, Shad, and thanks for all the work you've put into Gallery,
>>>>>> especially on the jQuery update! I agree with focusing on jQuery 1.9
>>>>>> instead of putting effort into the contributed module front.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd add that the type of notice proposed for codex and forum pages be
>>>>>> added prominently to the downloads page. A message on the upgrader page in
>>>>>> G3 would have the most visibility, a site status message wouldn't hurt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The creation of an email list which includes contributed module
>>>>>> developers (we don't have one, right?) might allow us to send due diligence
>>>>>> notices for these types of changes in the future.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Chad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Shad Laws wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey everyone,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just subscribed to the gallery-devel list.  Hello, everyone!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree that spending tons of time policing contributed modules
>>>>>> instead of wrapping up the jQuery 1.9 update doesn't make much sense.  At
>>>>>> the same time, if we do nothing, people currently using videos will upgrade
>>>>>> their core to v3.0.5 and never realize that they're still running hacked
>>>>>> v3.0.1 code for file_proxy and Item_Model, which imho also sounds like a
>>>>>> bad/dangerous idea.  My thoughts are to:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - add a notice about the deprecation to the release notes and forum
>>>>>> post for v3.0.5 (I can draft this up - when would you need it by?)
>>>>>> - edit the codex module pages and forum posts for the deprecated
>>>>>> modules and point to the notice above
>>>>>> - (optional) add a bit to the core code that, upon upgrade, checks
>>>>>> for the old modules and throws up a site message with a warning and a link
>>>>>> to the notice above
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my opinion, editing the contributed modules themselves wouldn't
>>>>>> have much of an impact, as the use case I imagine is where the user
>>>>>> upgrades the core of their existing installation without touching their
>>>>>> other modules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Shad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 19 February 2013 19:38, Bharat Mediratta <[email protected]>
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cc'ing gallery-devel for general interest.  We should be having more
>>>>>>> conversations here, imo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For those on -devel: Shad has done a lot of heavy lifting in the
>>>>>>> 3.0.5 release which is just about ready to go.  His work fixes up movie
>>>>>>> support considerably and obsoletes several contrib modules which were
>>>>>>> trying to work around these issues.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So the short answer is - we don't do anything.  Reasoning:
>>>>>>> - We really do care about our users having a nice experience
>>>>>>> - BUT we have limited time and have to care about the core
>>>>>>> functionality
>>>>>>> - if we spend our time policing -contrib modules it slows down
>>>>>>> release velocity
>>>>>>> - therefore we must focus on the things that only we can do and let
>>>>>>> the community do the rest
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There will be some breakage, the community will react and fix the
>>>>>>> issues and move on.  In the meantime, we'll have the time to focus on 3.0.6
>>>>>>> and the jQuery upgrade which is a far more impactful use of our time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's my rationale for why I'm not doing anything.  If you want to
>>>>>>> go hack up a couple of one-liners into those modules to check for a
>>>>>>> specific version of the G3 core and error out, etc - I'll be happy to field
>>>>>>> the pull requests :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Bharat
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 5:26 AM, Shad Laws <shad-xpYdmXCiSuZWk0Htik3J/[email protected]>
>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hey Bharat,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One last thought occurs to me re: 3.0.5 - how should we handle
>>>>>>>> deprecating the old, movie-related contributed modules?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> videos
>>>>>>>> - functionality: replaced by core core plus my new contributed
>>>>>>>> "movie_tools" module
>>>>>>>> - hack level: very high; replaces file_proxy controller, item
>>>>>>>> model, and movieplayer view (doesn't even use MY_ to extend)
>>>>>>>> - result of continued use: possibly dangerous or destructive
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> noffmpeg
>>>>>>>> - functionality: replaced by core code
>>>>>>>> - hack level: moderate; replaces movie helper (like videos, doesn't
>>>>>>>> use MY_ to extend)
>>>>>>>> - result of continued use: possibly dangerous, although less likely
>>>>>>>> than videos
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> videothumb
>>>>>>>> - functionality: not replaced, but doesn't take advantage of new
>>>>>>>> API changes (and "movie_tools" will do the same job using the new API)
>>>>>>>> - hack level: mild; gently uses its own controller and events, but
>>>>>>>> bypasses movie::extract_frame and all of its new enhancements
>>>>>>>> - result of continued use: can generate incorrect thumbs since it
>>>>>>>> bypasses movie::extract_frame and its recent DAR fixes, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> videodimensions
>>>>>>>> - functionality: not replaced, but no longer necessary since movie
>>>>>>>> player is now auto-resized
>>>>>>>> - hack level: very low; gently uses its own controller and events
>>>>>>>> - result of continued use: possible mild data corruption, as users
>>>>>>>> can write directly to the width and height entries of a movie without
>>>>>>>> sanity checks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Take care,
>>>>>>>> Shad
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
>> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
>> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb
>> __[ g a l l e r y - d e v e l ]_________________________
>>
>> [ list info/archive --> http://gallery.sf.net/lists.php ]
>> [ gallery info/FAQ/download --> http://gallery.sf.net ]
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb
> __[ g a l l e r y - d e v e l ]_________________________
>
> [ list info/archive --> http://gallery.sf.net/lists.php ]
> [ gallery info/FAQ/download --> http://gallery.sf.net ]
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb

__[ g a l l e r y - d e v e l ]_________________________

[ list info/archive --> http://gallery.sf.net/lists.php ]
[ gallery info/FAQ/download --> http://gallery.sf.net ]