The new tools now have more concise, more parallel names:
- rebuild-dev-database
- rebuild-test-database
The actual implementations are still pretty different:
rebuild-dev-database:
mostly delegates to 5 management scripts
rebuild-test-database:
is a very thin wrapper for generate-fixtures
We'll try to clean that up a bit soon.
We no longer need to maintain duplicate code
related to where we set up the emoji
cache directory.
And we no longer need two extra steps for
people doing advanced (i.e. manual) setup.
There was no clear benefit to having provision
build the cache directory for `build_emoji`,
when it was easy to make `build_emoji` more
self-sufficient. The `build_emoji` tool
was already importing the library that has
`run_as_root`, and it was already responsible
for 99% of the create-directory kind of tasks.
(We always call `build_emoji` unconditionally from
`provision`, so there's no rationale in terms
of avoiding startup time or something.)
ASIDE:
Its not completely clear to me why we need
to put this directory in "/srv", instead of
somewhere more local (like we already do for
Travis), but maybe it's just to be like
its siblings in "/srv":
node_modules
yarn.lock
zulip-emoji-cache
zulip-npm-cache
zulip-py3-venv
zulip-thumbor-venv
zulip-venv-cache
zulip-yarn
I guess the caches that we keep in var are
dev-only, although I think some of what's under
`zulip-emoji-cache` is also dev-only in nature?
./var/webpack-cache
./var/mypy-cache
In `docs/subsystems/emoji.md` we say this:
```
The `build_emoji` tool generates the set of files under
`static/generated/emoji` (or really, it generates the
`/srv/zulip-emoji-cache/<sha1>/emoji` tree, and
`static/generated/emoji` is a symlink to that tree;we do this in
order to cache old versions to make provisioning and production
deployments super fast in the common case that we haven't changed the
emoji tooling). [...]
```
I don't really understand that rationale for the development
case, since `static/generated` is as much ignored by `git` as
'/srv' is, without the complications of needing `sudo` to create it.
And in production, I'm not sure how much time we're really saving,
as it takes me about 1.4s to fully rebuild the cache in dev, not to
mention we're taking on upgrade risk by sharing files between versions.
Also make sure our documentation for upgrading is reasonable for
Stretch => Buster.
Our reasoning for deprecating support for these releases is as follows:
* Ubuntu 16.04 Xenial reached desktop EOL last year; and will reach
EOL on the server in about a year.
* Debian Stretch will each EOL in 2020 (the precise date is unclear in
Debian's documentation, but based on past precedent it's in the next
few months, perhaps July 2020).
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases#Production_Releases
* Both Ubuntu 16.04 and Debian Stretch use Python 3.5 as the system
Python, which will reach EOL in September 2020 (and we're already
seeing various third-party dependencies that we use drop support for
them).
* While there is LTS support for these older releases, it's not clear it's
going to be worth the added engineering effort for us to maintain EOL
releases of the base OSes that we support.
* We (now) have clear upgrade instructions for moving to Debian Buster
and Ubuntu 18.04.
This defends against cross-origin session fixation attacks. Renaming
the cookies means this one-time upgrade will have the unfortunate side
effect of logging everyone out, but they’ll get more secure sessions
in return.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
Steve Howell
Puneeth Chaganti
Anders Kaseorg
Alex Vandiver
Tim Abbott
Vishnu Ks
arpit551
Anders Kaseorg
Rohitt Vashishtha
Steve Howell
Aman Agrawal
Ray Kraesig