Thanks for the insight Chris.  I really appreciate your work and 
responsiveness.

--Steve


On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:07:18 PM UTC-7, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> Local sites aren't something that are deeply exposed. They're usable, 
> certainly, but my feeling is that you may really want two instances.
>
> With Local Sites, you can basically have a path that goes to a specific 
> site, which certain people will have access to. However, in your case, 
> everything that already exists on the server will be independent of  a 
> Local Site, so you'd be in this weird setup where some things are at, 
> /r/123, and some are at /s/sitename/r/456.
>
> We built Local Sites originally for RBCommons.com, our Review Board SaaS. 
> I don't know if anyone out there has used them for any other installations. 
> Possibly, and you could certainly try it, but there may be some gotchas.
>
> Christian
>
> -- 
> Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com <javascript:>
> Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
> Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Steve <seide...@gmail.com 
> <javascript:>>wrote:
>
>> We currently have 2 review board servers  running 1.7.6 on 2 different 
>> CenotOS 6 hosts.  We set up 2 servers way back in the 1.0 days to restrict 
>> visibility of some portions of our perforce repository.  I'm now tasked 
>> with setting up a third server with even greater restrictions.   All 3 
>> servers point to a single perforce repository. I don't want to tie up a 3rd 
>> box for this, so I'm looking to run 2 sites on 1 machine.  My first thought 
>> was to set up a second IP and try to get 2 different instances of RB 
>> running on the same box, but with distinct databases and directories.  But 
>> I see that 1.7 has private groups and the concept of 'local sites' which 
>> look like they may be another way to solve the problem.  However, I haven't 
>> been able to find enough detail on local sites to determine if I should go 
>> down that road. I was hoping others out there may have some hard-earned 
>> experience on which of these approaches is the most viable.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --Steve
>>
>>  -- 
>> 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...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "reviewboard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>  
>>  
>>
>
>

-- 
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
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to