Re: svn commit: r816092 - in /archiva/trunk/archiva-docs/src/site: apt/adminguide/repositories.apt apt/adminguide/upgrade.apt resources/images/repositories.png resources/images/tour/admin.png

[Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>]

On 17/09/2009, at 6:27 PM, oching@apache.org wrote:

>
> Modified: archiva/trunk/archiva-docs/src/site/apt/adminguide/ 
> upgrade.apt
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/archiva/trunk/archiva-docs/src/site/apt/adminguide/upgrade.apt?rev=816092&r1=816091&r2=816092&view=diff
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> ======================================================================
> --- archiva/trunk/archiva-docs/src/site/apt/adminguide/upgrade.apt  
> (original)
> +++ archiva/trunk/archiva-docs/src/site/apt/adminguide/upgrade.apt  
> Thu Sep 17 08:27:31 2009
> @@ -19,8 +19,10 @@
>    Because of the changes in the search implementation starting in  
> 1.2, a few additional steps need to be performed when upgrading  
> Archiva from 1.1.x to
>    1.2.x. Since the format of the index has changed in 1.2.x, the  
> old index directory (which is located at <<</path/to/repo/.index>>>  
> by default) needs to
>    be removed. And in order for the artifacts in the repository to  
> be indexed again, the last modified date of the artifacts need to be  
> updated.
> -   To do this, just execute <<find [REPOSITORY_DIRECTORY_NAME] |  
> xargs touch>> at the base directory where the repository resides.  
> Execute the repository
> -   scanning so that the new index will be generated.
> +   To do this, you can force Archiva to scan all the artifacts by  
> ticking the 'Process All Artifacts' checkbox then clicking the 'Scan  
> Repository Now'
> +   button in the Repositories page. Take note though that this  
> feature is only available starting with version 1.2.3. Otherwise,  
> you must execute
> +   <<find [REPOSITORY_DIRECTORY_NAME] | xargs touch>> at the base  
> directory where the repository resides and then force execute the  
> repository scanning so
> +   that the new index will be generated.
>

I'd altogether remove that last sentence now...

- Brett