Christian--

Sorry if I wasn't clear; yes the problem is with post-review's attempt
to automatically determine the repository. It looks like the
REPOSITORY setting should take care of this issue for us. Now time for
me to RTFM...

Thanks.
-Chris

On Jul 25, 5:05 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> You may have said this already and I may have missed it, but is the core
> problem with the various proxy names that post-review's unable to find the
> correct repository to patch? If so, you can reference repositories by name
> instead of by path:
>
> http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/manual/dev/users/tools/post-review/#r...
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:00 PM, chrisn <ch...@newbold.org> wrote:
> > Yes, thanks David and Christian for the tips on configuration that
> > enabled us to finally track down the mis-configuration. The final,
> > working configuration has the 'p4 info' name in the repository Path
> > and the proxy in the Mirror Path.
>
> > We still have somewhat of an issue with proxies, however. When the
> > server to which the proxy directs clients changes, Review Board stops
> > working until we manually update the configuration with the "new"
> > value from 'p4 info'. For example, we had things working at the end of
> > last week, but a weekend fail-over of the Perforce server changed the
> > result of 'p4 info' and everything stopped working again.
>
> > -Chris
>
> > On Jul 22, 9:47 am, SCFrench <sc...@mathworks.com> wrote:
> > > I've been working with Chris on this issue. We seem to have it working
> > > now. There appears to have been two issues that were combining to make
> > > this harder than usual to fix. First, the diagnostics on the call to
> > > p4 in get_file in perforce.py are relying on the exit status to
> > > indicate that something went wrong. However, as I found here:
> >http://forums.perforce.com/index.php?/topic/682-noob-question-changel...,
> > > the exit status of p4 is almost always 0. When I finally figured out
> > > what p4 command was being run by get_file, and ran it manually, I got
> > > this failure (edited slightly to remove private information):
>
> > > % p4 -p perforce-xx-xxx.mathworks.com:1666 -u cnxxxxxx print -q '//xxx/
> > > xxx/queue/matlab/src/m_interpreter/mi_interpreter/clear.cpp#17'
> > > //xxx/xxx/queue/matlab/src/m_interpreter/mi_interpreter/clear.cpp#17 -
> > > no permission for operation on file(s).
>
> > > % echo $?
> > > 0
>
> > > The link above discusses some ways to improve error checking on
> > > scripted p4 invocations, by using the -s option. Not sure if that will
> > > work for Review Board, but I thought I'd pass it along.
>
> > > The second issue was that once the file clear.cpp had been incorrectly
> > > retrieved, the bad (empty) version got cached, and subsequent attempts
> > > to fix the problem by changing the name of the repository at the admin
> > > site apparently were effective no-ops because that information is
> > > ignored if the file is already cached locally. Restarting memcached
> > > cleared the cache and allowed us to make progress on the first issue.
>
> > > Hope this information helps to make Review Board even better!
>
> > > Scott
> > > On Jul 20, 1:57 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Hi Chris,
>
> > > > The Path field should probably point to the proxy, and Mirror Path
> > should
> > > > point to 'p4 info'. It's a bit confusing (the Mirror Path name exists
> > for
> > > > legacy reasons) and I want to clean that up, but start with that.
> > Basically,
> > > > we'll always communicate through Path, but we check both Path and
> > Mirror
> > > > Path when using post-review.
>
> > > > We can't log the commands because, with the exception of one case,
> > we're not
> > > > calling out to p4. We're instead using the Python bindings for the
> > library
> > > > that is talking directly to the server.
>
> > > > Christian
>
> > > > --
> > > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
> > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 8:29 AM, chrisn <ch...@newbold.org> wrote:
> > > > > I just filedhttp://
> > code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2182
> > > > > to describe an issue with ReviewBoard and Perforce proxy servers that
> > > > > is effectively blocking us from using ReviewBoard.
>
> > > > > I'd appreciate any thoughts or BTDT advice about how I might be able
> > > > > to work around the problem.
>
> > > > > Thanks.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
> > > > >http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
> > > > > Happy user? Let us know athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/
> > > > > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
>
> > --
> > Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
> >http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
> > Happy user? Let us know athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/
> > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en

-- 
Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at 
http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en

Reply via email to