DotNetNuke

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

RLyda — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 13:05:48 GMT

Given the significance of the bad install document, perhaps a 3.1a would be in order. If we really don't want the black eye of unsecured backups of Web.Config and destroyed installs because of lost keys... Even if it is not "officially" denoted 3.1a, a refreshed release might save the *** of anyone who downloads after that inital stampede yesterday...

So far, it looks good otherwise! I appreciate all the hard work.....and the added docs.

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

Geert — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 04:43:45 GMT

Dave,

There is a mechanism in the installer that will show a "work in progress" kind of page while upgrading.
You need to set AutoUpgrade=false in web.config.
This will show the normal users a fixed page and you can upgrade the application with calling the install page directly (can't remeber the exact call right now
It is described on page 15 of the DotNetnuke Installation Guide.

The installer will be extra (but it will let you extract only the files also (without touching any settings)).

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

DBuckner — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 01:37:47 GMT

Geert wrote:

So it should be :

- Rename release.config to web.config and store database connection string in it

I guess when uploading through FTP you have no way to set the proper permissions on the files, so you would have to do that through a hosting control panel or something like that.

Geert,

Couple thoughts....

On Rename release.config.. I recommend maybe rewriting out web.config and leaving release.config alone. Suppose you want to deploy the latest bits to 10 remote sites. This would require 10 separate installs or re copying of removed/renamed files.

Another thing that is tricky with FTP deployments are how do you keep users & bots from hitting it while your uploading files. I have deleted default.aspx web.config and the rest of the root files when doing this to avoid this. Maybe the installer could do something similar and swap default.aspx for a default.aspx that has a site maintenance message?

Also, will the zip package be available as it is currently available without using the installer?

Anyway, just a couple thoughts
Dave

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

palaceguard — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 14:47:14 GMT

3.1 is released.

http://www.dotnetnuke.com/Default.aspx?tabid=703

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

fromuk — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 14:35:49 GMT

why not have a routine on startup that compares those keys with previously ones and keeps a seperate log file of changes, at least that way you have a backup for disasters

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

RLyda — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 13:32:49 GMT

You assume that they have been coding and testing each night after the convention sessions.....I'd bet more on drinking and carousing!

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

brian_c — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 12:57:34 GMT

well... 3.1 should be out tomorrow .. last day of conventions today .. finally over :)

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

Geert — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 12:50:03 GMT

alexdresko,

There are actually three keys in web.config that are important :

<add key="MachineValidationKey" value="????????????????????????" />
<add key="MachineDecryptionKey" value="???????????????????????" />
<add key="MachineValidationMode" value="SHA1" />

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

alexdresko — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 02:46:17 GMT

Hey, here's a good one for you (Maybe I'll have to start another thread for this)... I was just uploading a new 3.0.13 site to the production server and I noticed that the web.config contains TWO MachineKeys. From what I've read, ASP.NET will use the last instance of the key (it certainly doesn't complain about it), but I'm too scared to remove either of them. :) They're two completely different values. There IS a possibility that I did this on accident when manually upgrading my web.config from 3.0.10. You may still want to make sure this is taken into consideration. :)

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

Geert — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 21:16:40 GMT

DBuckner wrote:
Geert,

How is this suppose to work in a hosting off site? Install locally and upload files? Not all host's will run installers.

Cheers,
Dave

Currently I thought of this :
- Install locally
- Edit web.config locally
- Upload files through FTP

However I now realize this might only work for new installs, for updates I need to download the current web.config first.
Oh well, it is input like this that we need.

So it should be :

- Install locally
- Download web.config through FTP
- Rename it to web.backup.resources
- Copy the machine keys from web.backup.resources and store them in release.config
- Rename release.config to web.config and store database connection string in it
- Upload all files through FTP (including the web.backup.resources)

I guess when uploading through FTP you have no way to set the proper permissions on the files, so you would have to do that through a hosting control panel or something like that.

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

brian_c — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 21:03:15 GMT

kod .. if I catch you over here .. I will re-arrange some letters on your name :)

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

xpdit — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 21:01:21 GMT

oh, the truly sinister anagram is "Treats Revenge", what else do you have up your sleeve mister ?

hehe

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

DBuckner — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 20:55:39 GMT

Geert,

How is this suppose to work in a hosting off site? Install locally and upload files? Not all host's will run installers.

Cheers,
Dave

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

alexdresko — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 20:15:22 GMT

Alright, hand it over buddy. :) At this point I'm costing your host bandwidth pressing ctrl+f5 every half hour. We'll all accept it as beta 'cause we all know 3.1.12 is going to be the only rock solid version anyway.

Setup yer gemini project and throw the switch. I'm not getting anything done here! :)

Re: DotNetNuke 3.1 Status

Geert — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 19:26:20 GMT

toddhd wrote:
<hijacks thread>

I thought Geert's name looked a little suspicious, so I ran it through an anagram generator to see what evil might lurk therein...
http://www.wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=Geert+Veenstra

I think "Teats Revenger" was my favorite - cows everywhere, beware! But otherwise, he seems clean...

</hijacks thread>

Geert, to your knowledge, is that Installer something that might be used as a solution for the 3.1 release, or is planned for future releases only?

It will install the 3.1.0 release.
I have to discuss it with Shaun (and the rest of the team), but at the moment I don't feel it is quite ready for the masses ....
It was actually tested by some of the Core Team members and they immediately had some issues (which I fixed in the current version) even though it runs flawlessly for hundreds of installs on my systems ..

My preference is to release it as a beta version to gain experience ( we might set up another project in Gemini to enter the issues) with users setups.
There are so many possible variations if you start dealing with IIS, SQL Server, NTFS permissions ....