Hey Chris.

This was due to a bug I'm currently fixing. I should have it in in about 15
mins.

We've moved to using rb-site for site installations recently, and a recent
change to settings.py has it look for htdocs in the parent directory of
wherever settings_local.py is stored. This is due to the rb-site install
directory structure (sitedir/conf/settings_local.py, sitedir/htdocs/, ...).
I'm making it smarter so it will only do that if settings_local.py and
settings.py aren't in the same directory.

I would really recommend at this point using rb-site to do any site
installs, even if you're using svn. You can run "python setup.py install"
from your SVN checkout to get things installed so you can use rb-site. This
will maintain your tree, get everything put into the right locations, and
keep media files up-to-date.

The GettingStarted guide has more info for migrating to this.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VMware, Inc.


On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 5:13 PM, Chris Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> I've just moved to rev 1623 in trunk (I was at 1519). I do like the new
> "manual upgrade required" screen that pops up (settings.py has been
> updated to change the location for "htdocs/media/uploaded/images"). Very
> slick and should saves lots of admin hair pulling :-)
>
> However when I first loaded the main page (and review page) it appeared
> to be "messed up" in Google Chrome and IE6 (to the point that diffs are
> not usable). This turned out to be because the whole of the htdocs
> directory had moved (changes to settings.py), not just the upload dir.
>
>    REM this is new with heads revs as of 5th dec 2008
>    REM rev 1623
>    mkdir C:\svn\django\htdocs\media\uploaded\images
>    mkdir C:\svn\django\htdocs\media\rb\images
>    xcopy /S /Y C:\svn\django\reviewboard\htdocs C:\svn\django\htdocs
>
> I'm assuming I can still run from SVN without the deployment tool pre RB
> 1.0 - is this a bad assumption?
>
> Before the change RB was using (on this Windows box)
> C:\svn\django\reviewboard\htdocs. The good thing is that the manual
> upgrade required web page helped me work out what was going in.
>
> I also had some problems with the evolve, it worked but accessing (old)
> reviews (against svn) I get errors about bad change description/numbers
> :-(. Oddly the old reviews with my work in progress SCMTool are fine.
> I'm planning on starting a fresh db but I have copies (sqlitedb) if
> there is interest in debugging this. It isn't bothering me but I thought
> I would mention it (rather than logging a bug/issue). The pull from
> trunk also updated dbjlets, etc.
>
> I don't need fixes but wanted to share this in case other people hit
> this too (and in case I'm deploying incorrectly).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chris
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"reviewboard" group.
To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to