Dev

[harryrobbins]

Improved the data format for co-op financial data
moved the join, manifesto and about pages into static html managed through git (/web/join.include.html etc)
added more links to Discourse
tidied up a bit

[chriscroome]

That's awesome @harryrobbins :-)

Are there database changes -- I was wondering if updating the https://dev.coops.tech/ site with the uploaded files and data from the live site would be OK? This test might be worth doing before merging?

As far as I can see the reason why the README.md has conflicts is because of a typo of mine (that I thought @nicksellen had spotted and fixed already?), I have tried fixing this, :1,$s/cops\.tech/coops\.tech/gc but I seem not to be able to commit the fix... @nicksellen could you look at this when you get a chance?

[nicksellen]

It's because my change was to master branch not dev branch. We discussed it in cotech slack recently. See https://tech-coops.slack.com/archives/C3333BXQF/p1506423710000279.

Would make sense to either set dev to default branch (so merge requests go to it by default), or my preferred way is to use master to deploy the staging/dev site from (and create a seperate production branch to deploy production site from). Whichever way we should document the process in the README.

[chriscroome]

@nicksellen I think I'm happy for us to do it the way you think is best, just let me know which branch the https://dev.coops.tech/ site and the https://www.coops.tech/ sites should track respectfully, my only suggestion would be that if we had a free hand to name the git branches we could simply use the sub-domains (this would make adding others simpler?), so the https://www.coops.tech/ site would be updated from the www branch and the https://dev.coops.tech/ site from the dev branch. We have the existing names mostly by accident (though perhaps I copied the way Mailcow uses git since I have spent a lot of time following that project)...

[chriscroome]

I appear to have resolved the conflict with README.md.

[chriscroome]

I have upgraded WP-Piwik from 1.0.17 to 1.0.19, the other plugin updates I'm not so sure about:

• ACF to REST API we are on 2.2.1 and 3.1.0 is available
• Advanced Custom Fields we are on 4.4.11 and 4.4.12 is available
• Advanced Custom Fields: Flexible Content Field we are on 1.1.1 and 2.0.1 is available
• Advanced Custom Fields: Options Page we are on 1.2.0 and 2.1.0 is available
• Advanced Custom Fields: Repeater Field we are on 1.1.1 and 2.0.1 is available

Should these be safe to upgrade?

[chriscroome]

I have checked the functionality of the changes to the co-ops data fields, the now static included pages and have a browse around the dev site and everything seems to be working fine so I'd be happy to approve this unless @harryrobbins wants someone to check over the code changes first?

[harryrobbins]

All good from my perspective. Thanks for fixing the merge conflict - couldn't work or where that was coming from.

[decentral1se]

🍻