On 06/04/2013 09:15 AM, victoria wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Stephen Gallagher > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On 06/04/2013 05:47 AM, Christian Hammond wrote: > > On Jun 4, 2013, at 2:44 AM, Stephen Gallagher > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
