What to Install & Update? Clarifying CVS, Release Candidate, Head, Branches

Response from Support list:

Thanks much for your response, a few follow-up clarifications below:

On Mar 21, 2004, at 1:48 PM, Gerhard wrote:

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004, Kent Livingston wrote:

Looking for someone with more experience to help clarify, verify, or
simply set me straight ;-):

1) Would someone please point to (or help me write) a definitive
explanation regarding the differences between

A) CVS- Files currently listed as CVS in the download section

B) Head which may or may not be another name for "A" if it is slightly
different than the obvious CVS download where
is it located as a downloadable set of files - or is it?

Gerhard wrote: HEAD is just a synonym for the development version of the CVS
repository.

follow-up from Kent: Is the CVS repository the same as the 'obvioius' current downloadable CVS version? I recently downloaded and installed the downloadable CVS version which included a bug in the common.inc file. I found a more recent version somewhere in CVS and it fixed the problem. A day or more later I downloaded and installed a fresh install of the same located CVS and had the same issue which I fixed in the same way. All understandable, but it leads me to think that 'head' may not be the same as the CVS version that is listed in downloads.

Maybe in other words: Is downloading a nightly CVS snapshots from http://drupal.org/drupal/cvs/drupal/drupal-cvs.tar.gz the same as having the files that make up head and is it different than the CVS download available more directly from the drupal download page?

C) Release candidate/RC which may also be the same as the current CVS
or may actually be behind the current CVS?

Gerhard wrote: Some new features are added to CVS but not to the release candidate. The RC (aka Drupal-4-4 cvs-branch) should get more stable to be able to
release it as Drupal 4.4.

D) Branch(es) location where certain of these components may be
located? While seeing references to modules and the RC being in the
4.4 Branch it isn't clear exactly where this is located.

Gerhard wrote: In the CVS repository. Search drupal.org for cvs.

Kent followup: So the RC that is linked currently on the front page of the Drupal site downloads from the 4.4 Branch which means a person doesn't necessarily need to search for it?

I realize this may seem rather mundane, but for more experienced users it is probably impossible to imagine how the CVS area looks to a person who is new to it. I don't mean a person who isn't used to doing complex technical tasks, but just new to the way in which these things are referred to and stored at drupal.org. Your clarification is helpful.

E) Patches how can a site administrator identify required patches if
they've just installed one of the above verisons? How can they

Gerhard wrote: There are no required patches.

subscribe to a notification so they are notified when essential patches
are released?

If a essential bug should be fixed (or some number of non-essential
ones), a sub-version of Drupal will be released (see 4.3.1, 4.3.2).

Adrian provided touched on some of these here:
http://drupal.org/node/view/6060#9084 and I will edit and write up a
consolidation or update of the answers I receive or am pointed to.
Seems like a starting point for the documentation that I'm interested
in helping with for newbies.

Gerhard wrote:
Newbies should install the latest stable release and not bother about
patches or cvs.

Kent follow-up: Ideally this would be possible. I guess I should make a distinction between newbies who are not familiar with (nor interested in) system administration and those who are. We're both newbies but have different levels of motivation to learn and maintain the system software which runs a public or Intranet site.

Many people (as well as myself) would be happy to stay away from CVS packages and files until we read developers and more experienced users saying that certain functionality and solutions could only be found in CVS installations or modules.

As posted elsewhere I've been trying to make notes on some of these basic core concepts and installation choices in order to assist people new to Drupal. This includes people who are fully capable, I think, of working with CVS.

Example: the node weighting patch... for sites that are not satisfied with chaotic or last posted order it seems this patch is the only way to obtain some control over the ordering of nodes within a term. Do we want to deal with a patch or CVS....no but for many sites this type of ordering is expected and essential. Otherwise we have to go back to hand coding entire sites or sub pages where we need a specific ordering of nodes. If I am understanding correctly this patch is not part of CVS, but just a patch to accompany the module?

If they (we) can't get a handle on the
various starting points for installing a Drupal system it is hard to
address other orientation and specific questions.

2) I have several 4.3.2 installations I'd like to upgrade to current
CVS/Head/RC because of performance, features, and theme support I've
seen in other updated sites. If I update now are there any major risks
to subsequent updating to the final 4.4.x and/or subsequent CVS/head
versions from that point?

Gerhard wrote: Well, if you upgrade to HEAD, you can't easily go back to 4.4. If you upgrade to the rc, there should not be any problems.

Kent wrote: This is enlightening in a certain confusing way ;-\, but I understand it is consistent with what you say earlier. However, It would not be surprising if a person thought they could go from CVS to a very new major release. And I wouldn't be surprised if CVS works with many 4.4 code and modules... but of course it isn't the same because features and code is being added to it beyond the point of 4.4. Of course one has to ask themselves if there are reasons they'd need to go "back to 4.4" if they've been developing (as in developing their site - not code) on CVS from the start.

I've already taken the leap and updated two 4.3.2 installations to the
CVS/Head/RC and they are working well. If a person uses these interim
releases is it completely irresponsible ;-) not to apply the various
patches that I read about on the development list? I have yet to

Gerhard wrote: No. Not all those patches will enter the cvs repository.

Kent follow-up: CVS package on download page will have new patches included (relatively soon), but they will need to be applied to sites already installed?

attempt applying patches, I've run updates - but just haven't done the
necessary research to feel comfortable with the patching process.

Gerhard wrote: Read our handbook.

Kent follow-up: In progress... trying to clarify terminology, understandably language slips around a little bit on the site.

3) Am I correct in saying that 'major' Drupal releases are somewhat
arbitrary points in development where Dries and the active developers
come to a consensus that there are enough improvements, new features,
and is stable as possible to warrant a major release. But of course

Gerhard wrote: Yes.

development continues and the next day may bring patches, updates, etc.
and if a person is really serious about staying current you
update/patch as quickly as your own professional standards dictate.

Gerhard wrote: Patching is not neccessary, updating cvs is required. I don't think that you should run a production site this way unless you really know what
you are doing.

Kent follow-up: Certainly makes sense unless the production site needs taxonomy feature *and* requires functionality only available in CVS or patches associated with modules or modules improvement is only available via CVS. If people are clear about this (which is very difficult to understand until you've jumped into the water and start exploring the various underwater 'caves' of Drupal.

For example in the Windoze world some administrators never install the
next OS till the first service pack is released. With Drupal the
development is less consolidated so coming up with individual standards
regarding when you upgrade, patch etc. is more a matter of getting a
'feel' for the state of performance, features, and stability.

Gerhard wrote: There is nothing wrong with upgrading only if a new release is
available.

Cheers,
Gerhard

Kent follow-up: Really appreciate your taking the time to help clarify some of these probably extremely basic orientation issues.