I have recently upgraded a 7.11 install to a 16.1 install, and was unable to reu

PhilB

A Score Level 1

over 9 years ago

I have recently upgraded a 7.11 install to a 16.1 install, and was unable to reuse my configuration repository. I've been able to reuse that same repository from 7.9 through to 7.11, but doing so for 16.1 resulted in various errors (such as Exception: ObjectNotFoundException[SYSTEM_RECORD_TYPE_USER]), despite applying the (very few) changes recorded in the documentation.

My main concern was with the changes in the web.xml file; there are quite a few new items in the new version (com.appiancorp.common.logging.ConfigureLog4j, com.appiancorp.rdbms.datasource.BusinessDataSourceValidator, com.appiancorp.applications.BundledApplicationsLoader for example), and simply inserting the new web.xml into the old repository does not work.

I understand that the way around this is to create a new repository, then merge my changes from the old repository into the new one, but that seems to rather defeat the object of...

repositories.zip

Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible

Parents

0 PhilB
A Score Level 1
over 9 years ago

@Jim Agreed. Whilst "high-level" changes are documented, there are certainly background changes that aren't. Granted, we're talking super low-level - even internal architectural - changes here that only some server administrators would be interested in, but it would definitely be useful to have visibility of such changes.

@Eliot I'm surprised that you're surprised! Given the fact that the repository mostly contains *configuration* changes, it should - by its very nature - be relatively portable. Of course, every now and then certain configuration options might get deprecated (I'm referring to recent change, like deprecating an engine), but otherwise I don't see why a previous - in this case, a single version older - repository shouldn't be a starting point rather than something to be discarded.

Anyway, my main concern are the as yet undocumented changes to the web.xml file. Are you able to shed any like on the new item in that file?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Reply

0 PhilB
A Score Level 1
over 9 years ago

@Jim Agreed. Whilst "high-level" changes are documented, there are certainly background changes that aren't. Granted, we're talking super low-level - even internal architectural - changes here that only some server administrators would be interested in, but it would definitely be useful to have visibility of such changes.

@Eliot I'm surprised that you're surprised! Given the fact that the repository mostly contains *configuration* changes, it should - by its very nature - be relatively portable. Of course, every now and then certain configuration options might get deprecated (I'm referring to recent change, like deprecating an engine), but otherwise I don't see why a previous - in this case, a single version older - repository shouldn't be a starting point rather than something to be discarded.

Anyway, my main concern are the as yet undocumented changes to the web.xml file. Are you able to shed any like on the new item in that file?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Children

No Data