Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

orientdb has moved to different hosting and doesn't provide the old version anymore #30041

Closed
ericonr opened this issue Apr 6, 2021 · 5 comments
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@ericonr
Copy link
Member

ericonr commented Apr 6, 2021

https://www.orientdb.com points at https://orientdb.org , but I can't find the version of the package we use (2.2.29). Would suggest either updating or removing the package.

@bougyman

@ericonr ericonr added the good first issue Good for newcomers label Apr 27, 2021
@m0rg-dev
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like they have a GH repo that does contain tags for historical releases. 2.2.29 is on there, but it's also a major release and 3 years old by now so it probably makes sense to update.

@m0rg-dev
Copy link
Contributor

m0rg-dev@22c7d3f would get it on 3.1.11, which does appear to work (to the level of "you can start the server up and screw around with the demo database," at least.)

The only question I'd have is whether going from 2.x to 3.x would be a problem.

@ericonr
Copy link
Member Author

ericonr commented Apr 28, 2021

Maybe they have a porting document we could use? Does the service also work with that version?

I think people using this should be relatively aware of their stuff, so an update would be noticed anyway, and they'd probably know where to look for such info anyway, so if you can't find it I still think it's worth the update.

@m0rg-dev
Copy link
Contributor

http://orientdb.com/docs/3.0.x/release/3.0/Upgrading-to-OrientDB-3.0.html says 3.x is pretty backwards-compatible at least.

Per http://orientdb.com/docs/3.0.x/release/Upgrade.html, though, it sounds like they consider moving an existing installation from 2.x to 3.x to require some degree of manual intervention? Not sure.

@ericonr
Copy link
Member Author

ericonr commented Apr 28, 2021

I think these are all natural evolutions of the package, and not something that needs to be mentioned in an INSTALL.msg. So I'd go ahead with the simple update.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants