On 06/04/2013 09:15 AM, victoria wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> <step...@gallagherhome.com <mailto:step...@gallagherhome.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 06/04/2013 05:47 AM, Christian Hammond wrote:
>     > On Jun 4, 2013, at 2:44 AM, Stephen Gallagher
>     <step...@gallagherhome.com <mailto:step...@gallagherhome.com>
>     > <mailto:step...@gallagherhome.com
>     <mailto:step...@gallagherhome.com>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On Tuesday, June 4, 2013, pfee wrote:
>     >>
>     >>     Hi Christian, Stephen,
>     >>
>     >>     While testing Stephen's Fedora packages, on a F18 machine I
>     >>     upgraded from 1.7.7.1 to 1.7.9.  Following the upgrade, I
>     expected
>     >>     visiting the site's /dashboard URL would have told me to run
>     >>     "rb-site upgrade".  Instead I got a 500 "Something broke..."
>     message.
>     >>
>     >>     Despite not being prompted, I ran "rb-site upgrade
>     >>     /var/www/reviewboard" anyway.  The site came back to life and
>     >>     started working again as expected, however someone upgrading for
>     >>     the first time would not know to do this.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> Ah, thanks for reminding me. Not that anyone actually reads the
>     >> updates notes, but I usually put a reminder in that you always
>     need to
>     >> run rb-site upgrade after installing the packages. I'll tweak the
>     >> update notes when I get to work.
>     >>
>     >> I've been meaning to patch the Fedora packages to do this
>     >> automatically, by having rb-site install save a config file with a
>     >> list of installed sites so I can have the %post script run the
>     upgrade
>     >> on package install.
>     >
>     > I've actually been wanting such a file for Review Board upstream that
>     > rb-site can write to, so that we can be more intelligent about
>     upgrades.
>     > If you come up with a good way to do it, let me know :)
>     >
> 
> 
>     Has Review Board formally and without question dropped Windows support?
>     If so, it becomes reasonably easy to hardcode a requirement on a file
>     such as /etc/ReviewBoard/sites which could be as simple as
>     one-path-per-line, and then patch rb-site to amend it when doing an
>     install and to iterate through it when calling 'rb-site upgrade' with no
>     arguments.
> 
>     Then all I would have to do in the Fedora packages is call 'rb-site
>     upgrade' in the %post section on upgrades.
> 
> 
> 
> Just a comment from BitNami. Even if Windows is not supported it would
> be great you don't have any path hardcoded.  Currently we allow to have
> different installations in the systems in different installation paths,
> installing as root as an not root user. Of course this is also possible
> without using the BitNami installers. Having that hardcoded will affect
> this flexibility. If those are necessary I would suggest to have default
> values..but not hardcoded and not customizables values.
> 

Yeah, the same thought occurred to me a few minutes ago. I may just try
to make it a variable in settings.py or something, defaulting to
/etc/ReviewBoard, unless Christian or David has a better idea.

-- 
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