search

threerings / getdown

Download, Install, Update
Other
506 stars 125 forks source link

Getdown Launcher Requires Both digest.txt and digest2.txt on the Host #278

Open tom-mohr opened 1 week ago

tom-mohr commented 1 week ago

Hi! I think this issue might be a common source of confusion for people using Getdown for the first time.

Currently, java -classpath getdown-core-X.Y.jar com.threerings.getdown.tools.Digester myapp generates two files:

Regarding this, the Quick Start documentation states:

If your app has never shipped with the old digest.txt file, you can omit it from your app distribution and only use a digest2.txt file [...].

However, this is not true. The Getdown Launcher actually does require both digest.txt and digest2.txt on the host. See this issue where another user ran into the same confusing error due to the misleading documentation. In that thread, @samskivert confirms this:

So yes, [even] if this is a completely new app that has never had users, you do have to keep this vestigial digest.txt file around, which is annoying, but I didn't have time to do the extra work to make Getdown cope with not having a digest.txt file.

If it's too much work to make the Getdown Launcher work with just the digest2.txt file, at least, the documentation should be changed to correctly state that both digest.txt and digest2.txt are currently required on the host, i.e. that you can not omit digest.txt.

Kind regards Tom

bekoenig commented 5 days ago

Hi @tom-mohr,

@samskivert has discontinued java development and this main repository has only minimal support. I have taken over this project (see here) and released a new major version 2.0.

My company uses getdown and there we generate both digest files as we only need the digest2.txt file. I like the idea of ​​preferring the digest2.txt file, when available and use digest.txt only as fallback. I created a new issue. Would you test a draft of a first snapshot version?

Greetings, Ben

tom-mohr commented 2 days ago

Hi Ben,

I see, nice! It would be helpful if @samskivert would link your fork at the start of the old fork's README. I have now subscribed to the issue you created, so if there's a PR that references this, I could test it.

Greetings, Tom