Re: HTTPS support

[Christian Hammond]

Ah so you are running a custom one. It looks like it's hard-coded to use the
http:// path. You need to make it set to use https:// for your Review Board
URL.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com


On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Kunjal  wrote:

> What I found is that if I do not change post-review.py script at all,
> I can post the review but I can not post the diff.
>
> kapar...@ltsdo-kaparikh ~
> $ post-review.cygwin 275221 -d
>
> This tool looks at the given Pending-CL# & posts it for review.
> [Version: 200911
> 13_1141]
>
> >>> Repository info 'Path: pf-sj1-mob.sj.broadcom.com:1668, Base path:
> None, Sup
> ports changesets: True'
> >>> Generating diff for changenum 275221
> >>> P4CLIENT is LTSDO-KAPARIKH
> >>> status is pending
> >>> Lines are:
> ['//depot/Sources/Integration/Automation_Scripts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/
> ccb_cq_analysis.pl#5 - edit change 275221 (text) by kapar...@ltsdo-
> KAPARIKH\r\n'
> ]
> >>> Client LTSDO-KAPARIKH depot path
> //depot/Sources/Integration/Automation_Scri
> pts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/ccb_cq_analysis.pl
> >>> Writing
> "//depot/Sources/Integration/Automation_Scripts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/ccb_
> cq_analysis.pl#5" to "/cygdrive/c/Temp/tmpE2AEBQ"
> >>> Old file: /cygdrive/c/Temp/tmpE2AEBQ New file
> c:/Perforce/sysrel_scripts/CCB
> _CQ_Analysis/ccb_cq_analysis.pl
> >>> Attempting to create review request for 275221
> repository path pf-sj1-mob.sj.broadcom.com:1668
> >>> HTTP POSTing to
> http://mob-rb-test.sj.broadcom.com/api/json/reviewrequests/n
> ew/ :
> {'repository_path': 'pf-sj1-mob.sj.broadcom.com:1668',
> 'changenum': '275221
> '}
> >>> Review request created
> >>> --- c:\Perforce\sysrel_scripts\CCB_CQ_Analysis\ccb_cq_analysis.pl
> //depot/
> Sources/Integration/Automation_Scripts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/
> ccb_cq_analysis.pl#5
> +++ c:\Perforce\sysrel_scripts\CCB_CQ_Analysis
> \ccb_cq_analysis.pl   2010-04-
> 29 09:57:09
> @@ -13,7 +13,16 @@ use Win32::OLE::Const 'Microsoft Excel';
>  $Win32::OLE::Warn = 3;  # die on errors...
>  use Tie::File;
>
> ###
> -#All Variables declaration
> >>> Uploading diff
> >>> HTTP POSTing to
> http://mob-rb-test.sj.broadcom.com/api/json/reviewrequests/5
> 4/diff/new/:
> {}
> Error uploading diff: One or more fields had errors (105)
> Your review request still exists, but the diff is not attached.
>
>
> On Apr 28, 5:11 pm, Christian Hammond  wrote:
> > It should work with https fine. I use it with https every day. Can you
> paste
> > the output when using --debug with post-review?
> >
> > Christian
> >
> > --
> > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Kunjal  wrote:
> > > Here is the scenairo happening.
> > > We are using post-review.py file to post review.
> > > We close down HTTP port and open up HTTPS port.
> > > Now, when I post the review, I can not post review at all !!
> > > What I ovserve that in post-review.py, there are HTTP post methods are
> > > used and
> > > methonds like: self.http_post, http_get etc. are used.
> >
> > > Do we have post-review.py which supports HTTPS?
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > Kunjal
> >
> > > On Apr 27, 10:59 pm, Christian Hammond  wrote:
> > > > Review Board doesn't know or care anything about http vs. https. If
> > > you're
> > > > having issues with post-review, I suspect it's due to your existing
> > > > configuration referencing the http URL, which presumably doesn't work
> > > now. I
> > > > don't know how you have it configured, so it may be post-review.py,
> or a
> > > > .reviewboardrc, or a property on the repository.
> >
> > > > Christian
> >
> > > > --
> > > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
> >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Kunjal 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Chris,
> >
> > > > > Changes to Apache installation is done and we have moved our RB
> > > > > website to HTTPS.
> > > > > However, now when I post the review now, I can not post the diff.
> > > > > Does the HTTPS interact the way diff is done ?
> > > > > Do I need to update post-review.py script to update the url field
> to
> > > > > point to https?
> >
> > > > > Thanks a lot.
> > > > > Kunjal
> >
> > > > > On Apr 27, 10:45 pm, Christian Hammond 
> wrote:
> > > > > > Do you mean the Apache installation? That should work fine.
> Review
> > > Board
> > > > > > doesn't really care whether it's being used with https or http.
> It's
> > > a
> > > > > > matter of configuring your Apache installation and updating your
> > > > > > .reviewboardrc files (or whatever mechanism you're using for
> > > post-re

Using Reviewboard with Mercurial

[Andrew]

Hi.  I have a few questions for the reviewboard gurus.  I'm interested
in using reviewboard with Mercurial.

1. Does the --parent option work with Mercurial?  It's documented as
only working with Git.  If so, is there a workaround for usage with
Mercurial or a suggestion on how to review changesets whose parents
are not in the repository that Reviewboard is pointing to?

2. Often we will have a developer work on a series of changesets on a
branch.  Is it possible with Reviewboard to automatically create
review requests for a series of consecutive changesets, but tag them
so that they are all linked in some manner?

Thanks.

-- 
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

.reviewboardrc on windows

[Noah Campbell]

Hi Folks,

The docs (http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/manual/dev/users/tools/post-review/) 
are incorrect when specifying the location of .reviewboardrc on windows.  It 
should be: %USERPROFILE%\Application Data instead of 
$USERPROFILE\LocalSettings\Application Data

Great product, keep up the good work!

Thank you,
-Noah

-- 
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

Re: No new line at end of file crash diffviewer

[Chris Clark]

Christian Hammond wrote:

What version of patch are you guys running?


I'm running Ubuntu 8.04.3 LTS - I have patch 2.5.9


   ing...@reviews:~$ cat /etc/*elease*
   DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu
   DISTRIB_RELEASE=8.04
   DISTRIB_CODENAME=hardy
   DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 8.04.3 LTS"
   ing...@reviews:~$ patch -v
   patch 2.5.9
   Copyright (C) 1988 Larry Wall
   Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

   This program comes with NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
   You may redistribute copies of this program
   under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
   For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING.

   written by Larry Wall and Paul Eggert




And do the diffs have any indication at the end saying that there's no 
newline at the end?


Yes and no ;-) For me it depends on the diff tool used. E.g. some 
diff tools dump:


   \ No newline at end of file

at the point the newline is missing to stdout, for a single file diff 
this is at the end. For multiple file diffs this could be in the middle 
of the diff.


Some diff tools (e.g. Solaris) dump that information to stderr, if you 
redirect both stdout and stderr the position of that message can vary 
wildly.


Some diff tools do nothing. Which means that multi-file diffs with the 
"bad file" in the middle look corrupted as the next file starts on the 
last line of the previous files diff.





Also, what SCM?


I'm using p2 which has the option to use the platform provided diff (so 
sort of a lottery on the newline detection) OR perform diffs server side 
(which gives consistent output). The default diff format that is used 
for p2 is the default diff output (i.e. not a unified diff).


I'm not sure the SCM relevant, I think the issue is the diff and patch 
tools.


Chris

--
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

Re: AD Settings in RB

[Kunjal]

Thanks.
Is this feature will get supported in near future?

On Apr 29, 4:52 am, grimbeaver  wrote:
> You might be able to do it by setting the group name or a custom
> search root in the settings but I'm not real familiar with the AD
> scheme.  Currently I'm just using the Find DC from DNS option.  The
> other thing to remember is that a user is not created in reviewboard
> until after the user logs in once.  This makes assigning privileges
> kind of difficult.
>
> On Apr 29, 2:50 am, Christian Hammond  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > I was hoping someone else would respond to this. AD is a
> > contributor-supplied feature, which I have little personal knowledge of.
>
> > We make use of the Python ldap and DNS modules in order to handle
> > authentication. I don't know what is needed to support multiple security
> > groups, whether we need to modify code to allow for it or what. I'd love to
> > give you a better answer, but this is just outside my area of expertise. I'd
> > be fine with providing such support in our ActiveDirectory backend if
> > someone with the ability to test this could provide a patch.
>
> > Christian
>
> > --
> > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Kunjal  wrote:
> > > Can someone please replay as soon as possible?
>
> > > On Apr 27, 5:42 pm, Kunjal  wrote:
> > > > We have RB 1.0.5.1 installed.
> > > > We have configured AD settings so all the users can login easily.
> > > > Now, the issue is that we want to restrict users to only few
> > > > departments in our company.
> > > > So, we have created new windows security groups which has nested
> > > > multiple department names in it.
> > > > After doing this, the users of this departments can not access RB.
> > > > If we put one department group then it works. But nesting of
> > > > departments does not work.
> > > > Does the RB 1.0.5.1 has ability to put multiple windows security
> > > > groups for access/authentication? Is nesting possible?
>
> > > > --
> > > > Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today athttp://
> > >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 > >  oups.com>
> > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > 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 > >  oups.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 
> > athttp://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 
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
>
> --
> Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today 
> athttp://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 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

-- 
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

Re: HTTPS support

[Kunjal]

What I found is that if I do not change post-review.py script at all,
I can post the review but I can not post the diff.

kapar...@ltsdo-kaparikh ~
$ post-review.cygwin 275221 -d

This tool looks at the given Pending-CL# & posts it for review.
[Version: 200911
13_1141]

>>> Repository info 'Path: pf-sj1-mob.sj.broadcom.com:1668, Base path: None, Sup
ports changesets: True'
>>> Generating diff for changenum 275221
>>> P4CLIENT is LTSDO-KAPARIKH
>>> status is pending
>>> Lines are: ['//depot/Sources/Integration/Automation_Scripts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/
ccb_cq_analysis.pl#5 - edit change 275221 (text) by kapar...@ltsdo-
KAPARIKH\r\n'
]
>>> Client LTSDO-KAPARIKH depot path //depot/Sources/Integration/Automation_Scri
pts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/ccb_cq_analysis.pl
>>> Writing "//depot/Sources/Integration/Automation_Scripts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/ccb_
cq_analysis.pl#5" to "/cygdrive/c/Temp/tmpE2AEBQ"
>>> Old file: /cygdrive/c/Temp/tmpE2AEBQ New file c:/Perforce/sysrel_scripts/CCB
_CQ_Analysis/ccb_cq_analysis.pl
>>> Attempting to create review request for 275221
repository path pf-sj1-mob.sj.broadcom.com:1668
>>> HTTP POSTing to http://mob-rb-test.sj.broadcom.com/api/json/reviewrequests/n
ew/: {'repository_path': 'pf-sj1-mob.sj.broadcom.com:1668',
'changenum': '275221
'}
>>> Review request created
>>> --- c:\Perforce\sysrel_scripts\CCB_CQ_Analysis\ccb_cq_analysis.pl   //depot/
Sources/Integration/Automation_Scripts/CCB_CQ_Analysis/
ccb_cq_analysis.pl#5
+++ c:\Perforce\sysrel_scripts\CCB_CQ_Analysis
\ccb_cq_analysis.pl   2010-04-
29 09:57:09
@@ -13,7 +13,16 @@ use Win32::OLE::Const 'Microsoft Excel';
 $Win32::OLE::Warn = 3;  # die on errors...
 use Tie::File;
 
###
-#All Variables declaration
>>> Uploading diff
>>> HTTP POSTing to http://mob-rb-test.sj.broadcom.com/api/json/reviewrequests/5
4/diff/new/: {}
Error uploading diff: One or more fields had errors (105)
Your review request still exists, but the diff is not attached.


On Apr 28, 5:11 pm, Christian Hammond  wrote:
> It should work with https fine. I use it with https every day. Can you paste
> the output when using --debug with post-review?
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Kunjal  wrote:
> > Here is the scenairo happening.
> > We are using post-review.py file to post review.
> > We close down HTTP port and open up HTTPS port.
> > Now, when I post the review, I can not post review at all !!
> > What I ovserve that in post-review.py, there are HTTP post methods are
> > used and
> > methonds like: self.http_post, http_get etc. are used.
>
> > Do we have post-review.py which supports HTTPS?
>
> > Thanks
> > Kunjal
>
> > On Apr 27, 10:59 pm, Christian Hammond  wrote:
> > > Review Board doesn't know or care anything about http vs. https. If
> > you're
> > > having issues with post-review, I suspect it's due to your existing
> > > configuration referencing the http URL, which presumably doesn't work
> > now. I
> > > don't know how you have it configured, so it may be post-review.py, or a
> > > .reviewboardrc, or a property on the repository.
>
> > > Christian
>
> > > --
> > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
> > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Kunjal 
> > wrote:
> > > > Chris,
>
> > > > Changes to Apache installation is done and we have moved our RB
> > > > website to HTTPS.
> > > > However, now when I post the review now, I can not post the diff.
> > > > Does the HTTPS interact the way diff is done ?
> > > > Do I need to update post-review.py script to update the url field to
> > > > point to https?
>
> > > > Thanks a lot.
> > > > Kunjal
>
> > > > On Apr 27, 10:45 pm, Christian Hammond  wrote:
> > > > > Do you mean the Apache installation? That should work fine. Review
> > Board
> > > > > doesn't really care whether it's being used with https or http. It's
> > a
> > > > > matter of configuring your Apache installation and updating your
> > > > > .reviewboardrc files (or whatever mechanism you're using for
> > post-review
> > > > > support) to point to the https URL instead of the http URL.
>
> > > > > Christian
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > > > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > > > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Kunjal 
> > wrote:
> > > > > > We have RB 1.0.5.1 in production and it is http now.
> > > > > > We want to move it to https.
> > > > > > So, we did apache server settings and move RB to https.
> > > > > > But now I can post the review but I can not post the diff.
> > > > > > It gives me error.
> > > > > > Is HTTTPS supported in 1.0.5.1?
>
> > > > > > Because I see that in the roadmap of RB 1.5, it says ...
>
> > > > > > SSH and HTTPS support

Re: AD Settings in RB

[grimbeaver]

You might be able to do it by setting the group name or a custom
search root in the settings but I'm not real familiar with the AD
scheme.  Currently I'm just using the Find DC from DNS option.  The
other thing to remember is that a user is not created in reviewboard
until after the user logs in once.  This makes assigning privileges
kind of difficult.

On Apr 29, 2:50 am, Christian Hammond  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was hoping someone else would respond to this. AD is a
> contributor-supplied feature, which I have little personal knowledge of.
>
> We make use of the Python ldap and DNS modules in order to handle
> authentication. I don't know what is needed to support multiple security
> groups, whether we need to modify code to allow for it or what. I'd love to
> give you a better answer, but this is just outside my area of expertise. I'd
> be fine with providing such support in our ActiveDirectory backend if
> someone with the ability to test this could provide a patch.
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Kunjal  wrote:
> > Can someone please replay as soon as possible?
>
> > On Apr 27, 5:42 pm, Kunjal  wrote:
> > > We have RB 1.0.5.1 installed.
> > > We have configured AD settings so all the users can login easily.
> > > Now, the issue is that we want to restrict users to only few
> > > departments in our company.
> > > So, we have created new windows security groups which has nested
> > > multiple department names in it.
> > > After doing this, the users of this departments can not access RB.
> > > If we put one department group then it works. But nesting of
> > > departments does not work.
> > > Does the RB 1.0.5.1 has ability to put multiple windows security
> > > groups for access/authentication? Is nesting possible?
>
> > > --
> > > Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today athttp://
> >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 > oups.com>
> > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > 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 > oups.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 
> athttp://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 
> athttp://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

Re: Install ReviewBoard 1.5. Stucked when create site

[Christian Hammond]

Hi,

How did you install Review Board? You never installed another version of it?

Did you manually install Django Evolution?

I've never seen this problem before. It almost looks like it's trying to use
an older version of Review Board's model sets at some point in the
installation.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com


On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Le  wrote:

> This is my first time install Reveiw Board.
> My install environment:
> Windows XP SP2
>Apache 2.2.11
>MySQL 5.0.51b
>
> I installed followed dependencies
>python-2.5.4.msi
>setuptools-0.6c11.win32-py2.5.exe ( Python Setuptools
> Installer)
>patch-2.5.9-7-setup.exe (GNU patch)
>memcached-1.2.6-win32-bin.zip (and python-memcached binding
> also)
>PIL-1.1.7.win32-py2.5.exe
>pycrypto-2.1.0.win32-py2.5.exe
>MySQL-python-1.2.2.win32-py2.5.exe
>py25-pysvn-svn161-1.7.0-1177.exe
>mod_python-3.3.1.win32-py2.5-Apache2.2.exe
>
> after first few times failed, I install those two
>RBTools
>simplejson
>
> when i run the command to create the site ( rb-site install D:/tools/
> reviewboardsite),  to the last step, it always shows followed waring,
> 
> * Installing the site...
> Building site directories ... OK
> Building site configuration files ... OK
> Creating database ... Project signature has changed - an evolution is
> required
> OK
> Performing migrations ... The stored evolutions do not completely
> resolve all mo
> del changes.
> Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes
> required.
>
> The following are the changes that could not be resolved:
> In model reviews.DefaultReviewer:
>Field 'repository' has been deleted
> In model scmtools.Repository:
>Field 'visible' has been deleted
>Field 'raw_file_url' has been deleted
> In model diffviewer.DiffSet:
>Field 'basedir' has been deleted
> _
>
> Does any one have the same experiences?
> Any one knows how to fix it ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Tracy
>
> --
> 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

-- 
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

Re: ereviewboard plugin for Eclipse

[Markus Knittig]

On 03/24/2010 05:23 PM, Stodge wrote:
> Ah! I'm definitely using the right username so maybe it doesn't
> support accessing an RB site using Apache's basic auth. Thanks for the
> update!

The newest version should support this. Please update.
If it still doesn't work feel free to raise an issue on the github issue
tracker. Sorry for the late answer, I don't read this list every day...

Best regards,
 Markus

-- 
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

Install ReviewBoard 1.5. Stucked when create site

[Leeeee]

This is my first time install Reveiw Board.
My install environment:
Windows XP SP2
Apache 2.2.11
MySQL 5.0.51b

I installed followed dependencies
python-2.5.4.msi
setuptools-0.6c11.win32-py2.5.exe ( Python Setuptools
Installer)
patch-2.5.9-7-setup.exe (GNU patch)
memcached-1.2.6-win32-bin.zip (and python-memcached binding
also)
PIL-1.1.7.win32-py2.5.exe
pycrypto-2.1.0.win32-py2.5.exe
MySQL-python-1.2.2.win32-py2.5.exe
py25-pysvn-svn161-1.7.0-1177.exe
mod_python-3.3.1.win32-py2.5-Apache2.2.exe

after first few times failed, I install those two
RBTools
simplejson

when i run the command to create the site ( rb-site install D:/tools/
reviewboardsite),  to the last step, it always shows followed waring,

* Installing the site...
Building site directories ... OK
Building site configuration files ... OK
Creating database ... Project signature has changed - an evolution is
required
OK
Performing migrations ... The stored evolutions do not completely
resolve all mo
del changes.
Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes
required.

The following are the changes that could not be resolved:
In model reviews.DefaultReviewer:
Field 'repository' has been deleted
In model scmtools.Repository:
Field 'visible' has been deleted
Field 'raw_file_url' has been deleted
In model diffviewer.DiffSet:
Field 'basedir' has been deleted
_

Does any one have the same experiences?
Any one knows how to fix it ?

Thanks

Tracy

-- 
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

Re: AD Settings in RB

[Christian Hammond]

Hi,

I was hoping someone else would respond to this. AD is a
contributor-supplied feature, which I have little personal knowledge of.

We make use of the Python ldap and DNS modules in order to handle
authentication. I don't know what is needed to support multiple security
groups, whether we need to modify code to allow for it or what. I'd love to
give you a better answer, but this is just outside my area of expertise. I'd
be fine with providing such support in our ActiveDirectory backend if
someone with the ability to test this could provide a patch.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com


On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Kunjal  wrote:

> Can someone please replay as soon as possible?
>
>
> On Apr 27, 5:42 pm, Kunjal  wrote:
> > We have RB 1.0.5.1 installed.
> > We have configured AD settings so all the users can login easily.
> > Now, the issue is that we want to restrict users to only few
> > departments in our company.
> > So, we have created new windows security groups which has nested
> > multiple department names in it.
> > After doing this, the users of this departments can not access RB.
> > If we put one department group then it works. But nesting of
> > departments does not work.
> > Does the RB 1.0.5.1 has ability to put multiple windows security
> > groups for access/authentication? Is nesting possible?
> >
> > --
> > Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today athttp://
> 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 athttp://
> 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
>

-- 
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