* [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
@ 2012-06-17 9:22 grarpamp
2012-06-17 10:17 ` Gregory Maxwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: grarpamp @ 2012-06-17 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
Well, detachdb doesn't appear in the -\? help
because it's stuffed under pnp, which is not set
in my build. please fix for people, tx :)
#ifdef USE_UPNP
#if USE_UPNP
" -upnp \t " + _("Use Universal Plug and
Play to map the listening port (default: 1)") + "\n" +
#else
" -upnp \t " + _("Use Universal Plug and
Play to map the listening port (default: 0)") + "\n" +
#endif
" -detachdb \t " + _("Detach block and address
databases. Increases shutdown time (default: 0)") + "\n" +
#endif
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-17 9:22 [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place grarpamp
@ 2012-06-17 10:17 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-06-17 21:35 ` grarpamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2012-06-17 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: grarpamp; +Cc: bitcoin-development
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 5:22 AM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail•com> wrote:
> Well, detachdb doesn't appear in the -\? help
> because it's stuffed under pnp, which is not set
> in my build. please fix for people, tx :)
It isn't inside the ifdef in bitcoin git master.
(For future reference this sort of request is probably best opened as
an issue in the github issue tracker instead of posted to the list).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-17 10:17 ` Gregory Maxwell
@ 2012-06-17 21:35 ` grarpamp
2012-06-17 21:52 ` Gregory Maxwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: grarpamp @ 2012-06-17 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
> It isn't inside the ifdef in bitcoin git master.
Oh, hmm, well then, what is the difference or usage
between these two repositories in regards to the project?
Which one are the formal releases tagged (tbz's cut) in?
Which one has the branches with the commits that will
make it into the next formal release? ie: tracking along
0.5.x, 0.6.x, HEAD/master (to be branched for 0.7.x).
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
https://git.gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable
I seem to be seeing more tags in the former, and
more maintained branches in the latter?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-17 21:35 ` grarpamp
@ 2012-06-17 21:52 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-06-17 23:04 ` grarpamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2012-06-17 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: grarpamp; +Cc: bitcoin-development
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 5:35 PM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail•com> wrote:
>> It isn't inside the ifdef in bitcoin git master.
>
> Oh, hmm, well then, what is the difference or usage
> between these two repositories in regards to the project?
> Which one are the formal releases tagged (tbz's cut) in?
>
> Which one has the branches with the commits that will
> make it into the next formal release? ie: tracking along
> 0.5.x, 0.6.x, HEAD/master (to be branched for 0.7.x).
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
> https://git.gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable
The latter is Luke's backports of security and stability fixes to
otherwise unmaintained old versions.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-17 21:52 ` Gregory Maxwell
@ 2012-06-17 23:04 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 0:02 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-18 0:07 ` Gregory Maxwell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: grarpamp @ 2012-06-17 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
>> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
>> https://git.gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable
>
> The latter is Luke's backports of security and stability fixes to
> otherwise unmaintained old versions.
Ah ok, coming from cvs/svn, it's a bit different to find things.
There's something to be said for maintenance of pior branches.
Though I see some things I can use in github and my work would
be more useful there, so maybe I'll stwitch to that from gitorius/0.6.x.
Presumably the github/0.6.2 branch is safe for production?
What degree of caution about wallet eating should be
made for those using github/master?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-17 23:04 ` grarpamp
@ 2012-06-18 0:02 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-18 3:27 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 0:07 ` Gregory Maxwell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Luke-Jr @ 2012-06-18 0:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
On Sunday, June 17, 2012 11:04:42 PM grarpamp wrote:
> >> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
> >> https://git.gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable
> >
> > The latter is Luke's backports of security and stability fixes to
> > otherwise unmaintained old versions.
>
> Ah ok, coming from cvs/svn, it's a bit different to find things.
> There's something to be said for maintenance of pior branches.
> Though I see some things I can use in github and my work would
> be more useful there, so maybe I'll stwitch to that from gitorius/0.6.x.
>
> Presumably the github/0.6.2 branch is safe for production?
No, that was a temporary branch of what became the stable 0.6.x branch.
GitHub/master is bleeding edge. For production, you usually want the stable
branches/releases (which are on Gitorious).
The fix to -detachdb's position in -help was just merged to master, and should
be backported sometime in the next few days.
Luke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-17 23:04 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 0:02 ` Luke-Jr
@ 2012-06-18 0:07 ` Gregory Maxwell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2012-06-18 0:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: grarpamp; +Cc: bitcoin-development
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 7:04 PM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail•com> wrote:
> Presumably the github/0.6.2 branch is safe for production?
0.6.2 is very widely used, more so than the other acceptably updated backports.
> What degree of caution about wallet eating should be
> made for those using github/master?
I can't speak for anyone but myself:
I don't run master on wallets with large amounts of (non-testnet) coin
in them, except for a few times when I needed access to this feature
or that or just in a isolated capacity for testing. In any use with
real wallets I'd be sure to have good backups that never touched the
new code.
We have at various times had bugs in master that would corrupt wallets
(though IIRC not too severely) and have bugs that would burn coin both
in mining and in transactions (though again, I think not too
severely). My caution is not due to the risk being exceptionally
great but just because there is probably no remedy if things go wrong,
this caution is magnified by the fact that we don't currently have
enough testing activity on master.
Testnet exists so that people can test without fear of losing a lot of
funds and with the 0.7.0(git master) testnet reboot it should be more
usable than it has been. It would be very helpful if anyone offering
bitcoin services would setup parallel toy versions of your sites on
testnet— it would bring more attention to your real services, it would
give you an opportunity to get more testing done of your real
services, it would show some more commitment to software quality, and
it would let you take a more active role in advancing bitcoin
development by doing a little testing yourself that you couldn't do on
your production systems.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-18 0:02 ` Luke-Jr
@ 2012-06-18 3:27 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 3:57 ` Luke-Jr
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: grarpamp @ 2012-06-18 3:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
> be sure to have good backups that never touched the new code...
> We have at various times had bugs in master that would corrupt
> wallets
Sorry, that's to be expected, I shouldn't have asked.
> It would be very helpful if anyone offering bitcoin services would
> setup parallel toy versions of your sites on testnet...
Good point.
> we don't currently have enough testing activity on master.
I usually test compile / report current and stable of things I use.
So I get that github/master is the obvious top of things.
But in looking at where the tags are between repositories,
it's still not clear to me what the workflow is.
Example...
There are these release tarballs on sourceforge, which all have
tags in github, yet no tags in gitorious. There are no 'x' branches
on github, yet there is one release applicable branch on gitorious.
I guess I'd expect to see, that if as hinted by Luke that gitorious
has the stable trees, that there would be release tags there, laid
down at some comfy point in time on the 'x' stable branches there.
(The stable branches inheriting new code from master). But there
are no such tags.
And the releases/tags seem to magically appear from nowhere on
github :) Again, I'm trying to extricate myself from CVS here.
# sourceforge tarballs
0.6.0
0.6.1
0.6.2
0.6.2.2
# github branches
remotes/origin/master 432d28d Merge pull request #1477 from
gmaxwell/master
remotes/origin/0.6.2 40fd689 Bump version to 0.6.2.2 for
osx-special build
# github tags
v0.6.0
v0.6.1
v0.6.2
v0.6.2.1
v0.6.2.2
# gitorius branches
remotes/origin/0.6.0.x d354f94 Merge branch '0.5.x' into 0.6.0.x
remotes/origin/0.6.x 5e322a7 Merge branch '0.6.0.x' into 0.6.x
# gitorious tags
v0.6.0.7
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-18 3:27 ` grarpamp
@ 2012-06-18 3:57 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-18 8:09 ` grarpamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Luke-Jr @ 2012-06-18 3:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
On Monday, June 18, 2012 3:27:52 AM grarpamp wrote:
> So I get that github/master is the obvious top of things.
> But in looking at where the tags are between repositories,
> it's still not clear to me what the workflow is.
Workflow is all new development takes place in master during release windows.
Eventually, those windows close and master is cleaned up and bugfix'd for the
next 0.x release. Occasionally, when 0.N.0 has some problem before the next
release window opens, Gavin will use it to roll a 0.N.1 (and recently even a
0.N.2 and 0.N.2.2). Once the release window for the next 0.N version opens,
I import the (last bugfix-only commit after the final 0.N.M release made in
master) into the stable repository as the 0.N.x branch, and begin applying
backports. When there's significant backports, I'll tag another 0.N.M from the
branch and possibly release Windows binaries. Usually this happens around the
same time as master becomes the next 0.N.0 release.
> Example...
>
> There are these release tarballs on sourceforge, which all have
> tags in github, yet no tags in gitorious. There are no 'x' branches
> on github, yet there is one release applicable branch on gitorious.
>
> I guess I'd expect to see, that if as hinted by Luke that gitorious
> has the stable trees, that there would be release tags there, laid
> down at some comfy point in time on the 'x' stable branches there.
> (The stable branches inheriting new code from master). But there
> are no such tags.
I guess I've been neglecting to update the stable repo with releases tagged in
master. It should be fixed now.
Luke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-18 3:57 ` Luke-Jr
@ 2012-06-18 8:09 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 13:25 ` Luke-Jr
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: grarpamp @ 2012-06-18 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
> Workflow is ...
Thanks very much, I think that helps me/others. I did not realize
there were release windows in master and thought it more as the
typical full time dev slush. That also explains the presence of all
the release tags in github repo. And even, in a divergent way, the
presence of github/0.6.2 as path to gitorius/0.6.x. And I agree
with the (last bugfix after release) -> import/maintain model, it
would be similar in solo repo.
> I guess I've been neglecting to update the stable repo with
> releases tagged in master. It should be fixed now.
Yes, that has helped! Now git'ers can easily compare the release
tags to stable 'x' branches on gitorious. I don't know how to do
that across repos yet, save manuel diff of checkouts from each,
which would have been required prior to this update you made.
Also, these declarations of defunctness help sort out too.
# git branch -vv -a
"This stable branch is no longer maintained."
Ok, so for my works I will now track github/master (edge) and
gitorious/0.bigN(eg: 6).x (stable) against gitorious/bigTagRelease
(latest public). Thanks guys, and Luke :)
I hope other with similar questions find this thread. Apology for
subverting its subject somehows.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-18 8:09 ` grarpamp
@ 2012-06-18 13:25 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-20 9:06 ` grarpamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Luke-Jr @ 2012-06-18 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
On Monday, June 18, 2012 8:09:56 AM grarpamp wrote:
> > I guess I've been neglecting to update the stable repo with
> > releases tagged in master. It should be fixed now.
>
> Yes, that has helped! Now git'ers can easily compare the release
> tags to stable 'x' branches on gitorious. I don't know how to do
> that across repos yet, save manuel diff of checkouts from each,
> which would have been required prior to this update you made.
This is the work model I use:
git clone git://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git
cd bitcoin
git remote add stable git://gitorious.org/+bitcoin-stable-developers/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable.git
git remote add personal git@github•com:YOURNAME/bitcoin.git
With this, you can use "git fetch --all" to update your copy of the remote
branches, and access them as "origin/master", "stable/0.6.x", etc; and push
personal branches using "git push personal <branch>"
Luke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
2012-06-18 13:25 ` Luke-Jr
@ 2012-06-20 9:06 ` grarpamp
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: grarpamp @ 2012-06-20 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
> This is the work model I use:
Will try all these things out this weekend. Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-06-20 9:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-06-17 9:22 [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place grarpamp
2012-06-17 10:17 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-06-17 21:35 ` grarpamp
2012-06-17 21:52 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-06-17 23:04 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 0:02 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-18 3:27 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 3:57 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-18 8:09 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 13:25 ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-20 9:06 ` grarpamp
2012-06-18 0:07 ` Gregory Maxwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox