Upgrading Kolab 3.1 to 3.2 on CentOS 6.4

[Thomas Spuhler]

On Saturday, March 01, 2014 06:51:28 AM Brady, Mike wrote:
> On 2014-02-28 19:30, Rob Arends wrote:
> > Hi Mike.
> > 
> > I've search for 3.0 -> 3.1 in place upgrades and can't find the how to
> > instructions.
> > 
> > Since you have-done..., could you reply with the link(s) you followed
> > please.
> > 
> > Thanks very much,
> > 
> > Rob Arends
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: users-bounces at lists.kolab.org
> > [mailto:users-bounces at lists.kolab.org]
> > On Behalf Of Brady, Mike
> > Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 9:08 AM
> > To: users at lists.kolab.org
> > Subject: Re: Upgrading Kolab 3.1 to 3.2 on CentOS 6.4
> > 
> > On 2014-02-28 09:24, User, Kolab wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >> 
> >> Am 2014-02-27 09:33, schrieb Jonathan Lishawa:
> >>> Hello Everyone,
> >>> 
> >>> I am keen to upgrade my instance of Kolab 3.1 to 3.2 on CentOS 6.4
> >>> (X86_64). Is there a standard process for upgrading or does this
> >>> require a complete reinstall?
> >> 
> >> I think it is a serious flaw of kolab, not just to add a new repo and
> >> run yum update to get it updated with one click.
> >> 
> >> If the whole system needs to be reinstalled for a single update or
> >> needs to be reconfigured in depth, it is not worth useing it because
> >> without updating but security issues disclosed, it would be insecure.
> >> 
> >> This should be a topic for further updates.
> >> 
> >> Kind regards.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> users mailing list
> >> users at lists.kolab.org
> >> https://lists.kolab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> > 
> > Personally I don't have a problem with there being some manual steps as
> > long as they are clearly documented as it was for 2.x -> 3.x (a full
> > migration) and 3.0 -> 3.1 (an in place upgrade).  I have had good
> > experiences with both of these.
> > 
> > I think that this is just a combination of no documentation and
> > significant changes having introduced significant breakage.  In my
> > personal opinion 3.2 is just too broken to use.  This isn't just
> > upgrades.  There seems to be significant breakage on clean installs as
> > well.
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > users at lists.kolab.org
> > https://lists.kolab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> 
> http://docs.kolab.org/administrator-guide/upgrading-from-kolab-3.0.html.
> 
> I only did a 3.0 to 3.1 upgrade once on a test system, but I didn't have
> any issues with it.  At least none that were to do with the upgrade.  By
> that I mean there were issues with 3.0 that I hadn't resolved that 3.1
> did not fix.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mike


Thanks MIke for this link.

As far as you know, is there a document that explains which component version belong to which kolab 
versions like

Kolab-3.0 
Requires pykolab >= 0.5.14
Requires kolab-webadmin >= 3.0.3
etc

and Kolab-3.1.0
Requires pykolab >= 0.6.11
Requires kolab-webadmin >= 3.1.0
etc

Currently, we call it kolab-3.0.0 or 3.1.0 or 3.2.0 but we don't know what it really is.


-- 
Best regards
Thomas Spuhler

All of my e-mails have a valid digital signature
ID 60114E63
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.kolab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140228/050d5bcf/attachment.sig>