Hi, folks,
I was hoping that someone with more knowledge than I about the 6 -> 7 upgrade process would have a look at https://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/CentOSUpgradeTool
The page starts with a vague warning, and then continues to give detailed instructions, leaving it very unclear which parts the warning refers to.
If the process is broken, let's remove all of this and point to the correct process. If only a part of the process is broken, we need to remove that from the doc, and drop the scary warning.
As it is, the page *appears* to be a "don't do it this way" kind of page, and, as you know, 90% of people will simply skip past the warning and cut-paste the instructions.
Thanks for any advice and/or edits that can happen here.
--Rich
On 06/08/18 16:39, Rich Bowen wrote:
Hi, folks,
I was hoping that someone with more knowledge than I about the 6 -> 7 upgrade process would have a look at https://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/CentOSUpgradeTool
The page starts with a vague warning, and then continues to give detailed instructions, leaving it very unclear which parts the warning refers to.
It's not particularly vague.
[attachment:ArtWork/WikiDesign/icon-admonition-idea.png]
*DO NOT USE this tool. Warning: use of this tool is currently BROKEN as several system-critical packages are of a higher version number in CentOS 6.7 than they are in CentOS 7 so those do not get upgraded correctly. This renders yum and several other system tools non-functional.*
How much more definite about it being broken and unusable does it need to be?
If the process is broken, let's remove all of this and point to the correct process. If only a part of the process is broken, we need to remove that from the doc, and drop the scary warning.
It's broken and despite many calls for people to step up to maintain the tool, nothing has happened.
Trevor
On 08/06/2018 11:44 AM, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
On 06/08/18 16:39, Rich Bowen wrote:
Hi, folks,
I was hoping that someone with more knowledge than I about the 6 -> 7 upgrade process would have a look at https://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/CentOSUpgradeTool
The page starts with a vague warning, and then continues to give detailed instructions, leaving it very unclear which parts the warning refers to.
It's not particularly vague.
[attachment:ArtWork/WikiDesign/icon-admonition-idea.png]
*DO NOT USE this tool. Warning: use of this tool is currently BROKEN as several system-critical packages are of a higher version number in CentOS 6.7 than they are in CentOS 7 so those do not get upgraded correctly. This renders yum and several other system tools non-functional.*
How much more definite about it being broken and unusable does it need to be?
You're correct - "vague" was the wrong word here. What's confusing is that this comment is then followed by HUNDREDS of words of documentation. We've all spent years with users who, faced by a doc like this, will gloss over the warning and move right on to the instructions, because the two things contradict each other, and they're just trying to solve a problem.
If the process is broken, let's remove all of this and point to the correct process. If only a part of the process is broken, we need to remove that from the doc, and drop the scary warning.
It's broken and despite many calls for people to step up to maintain the tool, nothing has happened.
ok, I'll replace the entire page with "This tool is no longer maintained" and leave it at that, unless anyone objects.
Leaving detailed incorrect instructions "for historical purposes" never ends well.
Thanks for the input.
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 11:55:41AM -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
You're correct - "vague" was the wrong word here. What's confusing is that this comment is then followed by HUNDREDS of words of documentation. We've all spent years with users who, faced by a doc like this, will gloss over the warning and move right on to the instructions, because the two things contradict each other, and they're just trying to solve a problem.
Yes. Which is why I wanted the crusty and worthless old docs gutted. Because people _still_ were referring to them until a few weeks back.
ok, I'll replace the entire page with "This tool is no longer maintained" and leave it at that, unless anyone objects.
Thank you!
Leaving detailed incorrect instructions "for historical purposes" never ends well.
Indeed.
John
I think we (Sangoma) are the only people maintaining it in the Open Source arena. I recently backported everything from upstream into our upgrade repository.
https://wiki.freepbx.org/display/PPS/Upgrading+from+FreePBX+10.13.66+to+SNG7
We, however, have a much simpler situation, as I can explicitly go through and blow away irrelevant and unneeded packages, as all I need to do is present the end user with a working PBX 8-)
--Rob
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 at 05:42, John R. Dennison jrd@gerdesas.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 11:55:41AM -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
You're correct - "vague" was the wrong word here. What's confusing is that this comment is then followed by HUNDREDS of words of documentation. We've all spent years with users who, faced by a doc like this, will gloss over the warning and move right on to the instructions, because the two things contradict each other, and they're just trying to solve a problem.
Yes. Which is why I wanted the crusty and worthless old docs gutted. Because people _still_ were referring to them until a few weeks back.
ok, I'll replace the entire page with "This tool is no longer maintained" and leave it at that, unless anyone objects.
Thank you!
Leaving detailed incorrect instructions "for historical purposes" never ends well.
Indeed.
John-- The only time men should be dancing is when other men are shooting at their feet.
-- Tim Allen, Last Man Standing _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
John R. Dennison -
Rich Bowen -
Rob Thomas -
Trevor Hemsley