webERP Forum

Full Version: Pending 4.15.2 release
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Yes, but if the demoDB does not have the inserted data that demo.sql has (not all demo inserts are populated, from what I see, that's what I'm working through now) ... then some of the data that you added will be lost? ... unless this is something not to worry about?
What I used to do was to start with a fresh install of the demo.sql from the previous release, into a new weberpdemo database. Then run any updates between releases, and then run the script on that database. That should provide you with the right data in the right files.

Thanks Tim, that helped. (is it odd the that the demo's chartdetails has over 10k rows? ... the GUI timed-out at that area, had to run from the command line)

Release update:
So I was able get through the make_release, but I need to stop for now. To this point has taken far more time than expected today, and I have yet to do the release notes, and so forth, so not sure if I can finish Monday night, but should not be a problem Tuesday evening.

Stay tuned!
chartdetails does tend to get big. Looking at the demo data it includes periods up to 2036-08-31 (nearly 15 years in the future!!). The chartdetails contains one line for every GL code for every period. Looking at my weberpdemo chartdetails actually has 41464 rows, 284 periods x 146 GL accounts. I would suggest (you will need to turn foreign key checks off):

DELETE FROM chartdetails WHERE period>133;
DELETE FROM gltrans WHERE period>133
DELETE FROM periods WHERE periodno>133;

which would still leave 23944 rows, but makes more sense.

Thanks, Tim. If I delete those rows, should I re-run the make_release afterwards? (if so, not a big deal now that I've made it this far)

Side note: ... I realized something cross-checking release things:
With the last two releases, we have said that webShop is now bundled since v4.15.

Well, this has been true for the zip file created by make_release, and those at SourceForge would have received downloading the zip, but the release zips that GitHub creates at the the Releases section does not include webShop in the same way. The GitHub zip files strictly refer to the webERP commit tag reference.

Any idea(s) what to do for this matter? I was thinking about simply adding a link in the release notes to the webShop repo, unless there is something better that we can do.
I don't think webShop should be part of the release. It is something that will not be of use to the bulk of people, and as it is a separate project it would be better to just provide a link as you suggest.

If you agree with removing those lines (it is caused by a couple of rogue transactions with a 2036 date) then I would run the script again. It might also be worth running the Z_ReTongueostGLFromPeriod.php script just as a precaution as well.

Update: now have a small testing quirk, maybe?

A test install went well, however, we seem to have lost table deliverynotes? I noted that my install had 161 tables, before release, but when I reloaded the demo for release, there was only 160 tables.

A diff of show tables between the two DB's indicated deliverynotes. After test running the zip from the make_release as a fresh install of both weberp and weberpdemo, now both DB's only have 160 tables.

Removal may have been intentional, was removed with this commit. (line 710) ... but I did also note that there are NO script query references to the deliverynotes table acking the code base, so it appears to be an orphaned table, safely removed?

There was an ALTER to this table in 4.15.1, so just double-checking if we should keep it, or not?
Makes me wonder if we should add a DROP for the deliverynotes table in the upgrade SQL?

Not a big deal, I can create a quick release testing branch to add the drop, if needed, but if not, then I can cover the remainder tomorrow, so please let me know.
I have the other release information staged (the release add/fixed/changed/security brief, and a contributors list ready to go)

I've merged the release branch changes to main, so THAT commit will be the release reference point, unless we add the table drop.


Other than that, back to the chartdetails ... I did not show periods as high as 133.
So what I did was to check the highest period in gltrans (was 62) and the other two tables had periods to 84.
So I removed all records > 62 in periods and chartdetails, and ran the suggested Z_RePost script.
Afterwards, the chartdetails records dropped from ~10k+ to ~7k+, or about a 1/3 reduction.
All seems good on this point.
Very strange, that table came in on release 3.11 ( a very long time ago - more than 10 years. However I can't see it ever being used in the code so I guess it must be OK to delete it.

As the release has dragged-on long enough, and since we've been talking about a major version bump with next release after this one...

I think I'll wait on the table drop (will add a discussion item about it), and webSHOP will still be included with the current zip to sourceforge (already built), I'll add/remove these when the other future release comes around, so that this one can be done.
Pages: 1 2