[Building Sakai] Who is using 2.7.1?

[Kevin Chan]

Hi Josh,

UC Berkeley is in the process of finishing up QA efforts for our Sakai 
2.6 -> Sakai 2.7 migration. We will be running against the Sakai 2.7.x 
maintenance branch (rev. 93728 for our initial 2.7 release). The 2.7.x 
branch should have most (if not all) patches that UMich provided back to 
the Sakai community to fix some major performance issues; specifically, 
the major performance issue involved the Kernel and site caching:

https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/KNL-652

Link to some discussion on the TCC list re: testing this fix:
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/2011-March/000987.html

So an out of the box Sakai 2.7.1 is probably not the best to run for a 
production environment with any sort of load.

As for our current QA efforts, we did find a regression bug with the 
Syllabus tool and filed:

https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-20748 [Emails with Syllabus 
attachments contains only the relative link]

As far as I can tell, this issue was introduced with the fix for:
https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-20359 [Syllabus attachments are 
storing the full absolute URL instead of the relative URL]

Which all means that SAK-20748 is going to show up for Sakai 2.7.2 and 
2.8.1 (along with their respective maintenance branches).

   Kevin Chan

   Operations Team
   Educational Technology Services
   UC Berkeley


On 7/2/11 11:47 AM, Matthew Jones wrote:
> I'll put in an *(*) *that the CTools build is highly patched and 
> basically a fork of 2.7.1. We have a number of patches, many 
> performance related, against 2.7.1. Almost all of these are targeted 
> for 2.7.2 which is planned for late July. I wouldn't advise going with 
> a stock 2.7.1 in production at this point release unless at least you 
> were switching in the newest version of the kernel or just testing it.
>
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Sean DeMonner <demonner at umich.edu 
> <mailto:demonner at umich.edu>> wrote:
>
>     Michigan is at 2.7.1, running against (as of this morning) Oracle
>     11g. Our experience with 2.7.1. has been good so far.
>
>     SMD.
>
>
>
>     On Jul 1, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Joshua Swink wrote:
>
>>     At UC Merced we are moving to version 2.7.1. I was wondering who else
>>     is using 2.7.1 and how are your experiences with it?
>
>
>     ====================================================
>     Sean DeMonner, Director, Teaching & Learning, ITS
>     3350 Duderstadt Center, University of Michigan, (734) 615-9765
>     <tel:%28734%29%20615-9765>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     sakai-dev mailing list
>     sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
>     <mailto:sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org>
>     http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
>
>     TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
>     sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org
>     <mailto:sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org> with a
>     subject of "unsubscribe"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-dev mailing list
> sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-dev/attachments/20110705/e9b1c991/attachment.html