These are chat archives for adaptlearning/adapt_authoring

1st
Sep 2017
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 06:23
We can always branch for v3 @brian-learningpool
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 08:09
at least until 0.5, @taylortom
i think we need to sync development between the AT and the framework until v3 is released
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 08:20
how come?
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 08:23
@brian-learningpool do you mean their are breaking changes between 2.x and 3.x of the framework that the AT will have to be updated to deal with?
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 08:29
exactly, Louise, e.g. this change to move the completion criteria to config
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 08:35
Ok i created an issue for this a while back adaptlearning/adapt_authoring#1703
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 08:38
great. i think part of that would involve restricting the installable framework versions, until we know what the full impact of v3 will be
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 08:59
may i suggest we make v3 backward compatible with the _spoor._config bits?
so that the AT is able to carry on as before
it seems a tad extreme to limit the versions for 2 binary config options
Dan Gray
@dancgray
Sep 01 2017 09:05
The instruction text changes are potentially breaking as well? adaptlearning/adapt_framework#1743
Tom Taylor
@taylortom
Sep 01 2017 09:10
Does v3 have a release date yet?
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:16
on Tuesday's framework call it was proposed to tag a v3 alpha or beta release pretty soon
part of the reason why i'm proposing a limit is because of the dropping of support for IE 8 - 10 on the output too
i'd be a bit miffed if i upgraded and suddenly my courses stopped working as expected
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:25
we're back to the one framework vs multiple courses problem again :/
freezing the version in the AT isn't going to stop that problem
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:30
and users have to take some responsibility for the upgrade process, especially over major version numbers
dropping ie8/9/10 has been coming for a while
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:31
yes, and i have no problem with that
but 0.4 isn't a major version number
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:32
so, version 0.4 would be tied to 2.2.x?
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:32
at least if we say 0.4 is the last version which will support IE8, 9, etc. we can then say 0.5 drops all that and is tied to the v3 goodness
exactly
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:33
how long are we talking between 0.4 and 0.5?
cos that has some serious maintenance ramifications for the framework side
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:34
it could be a week, if we just want to allow users to upgrade to v3 immediately
the problem is that the impact is a bit unknown at the minute, i.e. the completion criteria, the instruction text
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:35
in normal curcumstances i would agree with you @oliverfoster but as the upgrade script is gives no controll to a user what version to install and does not allow rolling back it will cause issues if we dont adress it in some way
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:36
the ramifications are pretty isolated and quite easy to discover
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:36
at least this way we give users a version of the authoring tool a framework which has been thoroughly tested, plus it means the framework can be tagged as v3 pre release
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:37
in its current state i think the install script will pull any release even pre-release so i would say hold off that for now
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:37
timing this with 0.4 buys us some time to discover what those ramifications actually are
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:38
0.5 hasint been discussed yet @oliverfoster but looking at the release cadence of the last few releases its not likely to be as rapid as the framework
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:39
i really don't think it's a big deal to link a version of the AT with a version of the framework
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:39
it's a big deal if we have to maintain two versions of the framework
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:40
why would you?
if we just stop the upgrade script puling anything > 2.x
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:40
that means we have to fix the bugs in 2.x as they arrise
all our effort is on v3 atm
Dan Gray
@dancgray
Sep 01 2017 09:41
I though v2.x was going to have bugs fixed for a while?
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:41
you should probly be supporting them for legacy reasons anyway.
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:41
that's what @moloko said
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:42
i would not expect everyone to instantly upgrade all their courses to 3.x especially if it contains breaking changes
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:42
the intention of keep v2 wasn't so that all the AT users can use it. it was more for people who really needed ie8, which is a tiny fraction of people, mostly companies with tech resource of their own.
the only reason this is being talking about is because the existing upgrade process for the AT isn't good.
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:43
Well if you can come up with migrations or a easy upgrade path then it wont be an issue but it curently is
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:44
without the dropping of ie8 there would be no option to use an alternative branch of the code and to avoid breaking changes
Matt Leathes
@moloko
Sep 01 2017 09:45

that means we have to fix the bugs in 2.x as they arrise

That was the plan though...

Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:45
not for the whole AT user community it wasn't
Matt Leathes
@moloko
Sep 01 2017 09:45
for the next few months at least, original plan was to review end of year
does the size of the community make a difference ?
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:46
nobody's disputing the focus should be on v3, but limiting the framework version on the AT -- possibly just for a few weeks -- doesn't impact that
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:46
it has a direct corrolation to the amount of effort needed and the deviations and the forum questions that have to answered about why we can't backward migrate v3 changes
Matt Leathes
@moloko
Sep 01 2017 09:47
who's asking about backwards migration of v3 changes?
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:47
the users who are using the AT now are all using pre v3, and we're not inundated with IE 8 issues
Matt Leathes
@moloko
Sep 01 2017 09:48
should get better now that we're not making any changes to it
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:48
i wasn't referencing ie8 issues
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 09:48
if anything drawing a line and saying 0.4 is the last version to support framework 2, 0.5 will support framework 3 and up makes our position clear
Matt Leathes
@moloko
Sep 01 2017 09:49
sounds good to me
esp. if you expect to have 0.5 out pretty soon
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 09:49
I think this should be discussed in the AT meeting on tuesday
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 09:54
so, without exploring the ramifications of the schema changes or quanitfying and mitigating the completion change issue or informing the community of the ie8/9/10 drops, we're going to write some code to prevent all of the AT users from upgrading their frameworks for an unknown period of time, potentially extending the effort required to support v2? all i'm saying is that we could write some code to prevent the AT from downloading interim releases, or just not releasing a v3 beta instead until those above things are quanitifed?
we should already be able to test the schema changes, we just need a version of the at setup that is representative of the issue and that no-one minds breaking.
we can certainly start the coms around ie8 stuff
we can do the "don't update to interim releases" code, which we'll always need, it's not a one time thing
the completion stuff, i'm pretty sure we can make backwards compatible
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:00
^ this stuff we're going to need to do anyway? surely
perhaps aside from making the completion criteria backwards compatible
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 10:00
not installing interim releases makes perfect sense
but what goes in the framework always drives what goes in the authoring tool
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:01
it give us a lot more space to do candidate releases, betas, alphas etc
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:01
you can tag and do them now just dont mark them as a release
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:02
yup @canstudios-louisem so, why not do that for the time being?
quick, easy, no hassle
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:02
even if we put that code into 0.4 anyone still on 0.3 will get them
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 10:03
if we tag v3 in the framework, and AT users upgrade to it they might find, for example, that the UI doesn't yet reflect what should be there for v3
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:03
@canstudios-louisem did you not just describe the issue we'd have with any version control code as well?
anyone with a preexisting install isn't prevented from upgrading at all
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:04
if its not marked as a release just a git tag AT users wont be able to upgrade to it
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:04
ok, so between the pair of you it seems like we've got crossed wire about how the AT chooses to upgrade
is it tags or releases?
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:04
releases
it uses the github api and gets the latest
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:06
how does one tag without creating a release?
Brian Quinn
@brian-learningpool
Sep 01 2017 10:07
it can be done via the command line
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:07
you just make a tag in git as you normally would you need to explictly mark it as a release on gihub.
wait a mo im looking at the code now it does use tags
ignore what i was saying you cant
We should probly change that but same as before it wont affect 0.3.0 and down
sory
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:10
so, we can work in master or a branch for v3 without creating a beta release for the moment, whilst you guys work on the code for limiting interim (x.x.x-anything) releases in the AT?
and we'll have to make some noise about it to the people with preexisting installations?
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:12
probably just dont tag anything. Like I said it should be discussed at the AT meeting .
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:12
ok, i think we can abide by that for a good while whilst a better plan of action is made.
it'd be good if we can make some noise about dropping ie8, upgrading to the framework v3 and how to go about using the AT+v2.x if you really need it
whilst exploring the implications of the conceptually breaking changes (which we currently don't really know are breaking, right?)
i have a feeling that very few people will want the AT+v2
when we said we're dropping ie8 in the framework chat, most everyone cheered and some people shrugged and said "we knew that was coming"
mostly the reaction was: "about f*ing time!"
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:18
i'd expect to see that reaction replicated in the AT
this is a good opportunity to get the future upgrade path smoothed a little
it's going to be happening more often
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:34
The issue you have with the at is all your courses use the same framework. If your just building in the framework and have that one client that needs ie8 its fine you just use the old framework. With the AT its not as easy.
ive made a pr to use release's not tags adaptlearning/adapt_authoring#1724
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:39
nope, i keep having that conversation with as many people as i can @canstudios-louisem
we need a working group for solutions to it
i have ideas but they're quite substantial
there might be easier options
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:47
@canstudios-louisem side question: would that pr exclude any releases with the "mark as pre-release" checkbox ticked? it could make it handy for terminal illiterates to publish releases which are excluded from the upgrade cycle if it did
no it won't it'll just return the latest_release json with a property of "prerelease": true
which ain't helpful
could do > https://api.github.com/repos/adaptlearning/adapt_authoring/releases + a filter for prerelease? make it a little more robush?
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 10:51
the github releases/latest api only returns full releases not pre or draft releases
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 10:52
lovely
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 11:28
is there a way of getting this back into previous installations?
either manually by the willing or automatically?
or preventing previous AT installations from upgrading to v3.alpha/v3 without holding the release indefinitely?
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 13:36
not currently
the upgrade script is quite simple some stuff is on the roadmap to improve it
I did push the can changes into a pr but we decided not to merge them
Oliver Foster
@oliverfoster
Sep 01 2017 14:03
cool, as long as there is some documentating to mitigate those issues and we can solve some of them in the next releases for future i think that's the best we can muster then. is it worth considering Brian's idea about being able to limit future AT versions to a major version of the framework?
so that each release is tied to a major version at bare minimum
Louise McMahon
@canstudios-louisem
Sep 01 2017 14:08
thats someting we should discuss at the meeting