Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

[Ken Erickson]

I just found it already posted under another 
thread https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/reviewboard/uXxkNePzSTs


On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 3:00:57 PM UTC-7, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:22 PM Ken Erickson  > wrote:
>
>> I just installed 2.5.2 on CentOS 7 for testing, other than comments below 
>> I haven't found anything.  
>> I do have a question, I installed the Comment Categorization extension 
>> and added 4 types to it but when I try to use it the list is empty on 
>> review comments?  It acted the same under 2.0 as well. 
>>
>>
> Could you raise that in a separate thread? I suspect we'll need to hear 
> from the upstream developers, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were only 
> skimming this thread since it's about a downstream package.
>

-- 
Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: 
https://rbcommons.com/
Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/
--- 
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/d/optout.

Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:22 PM Ken Erickson  wrote:

> I just installed 2.5.2 on CentOS 7 for testing, other than comments below
> I haven't found anything.
> I do have a question, I installed the Comment Categorization extension and
> added 4 types to it but when I try to use it the list is empty on review
> comments?  It acted the same under 2.0 as well.
>
>
Could you raise that in a separate thread? I suspect we'll need to hear
from the upstream developers, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were only
skimming this thread since it's about a downstream package.

-- 
Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: 
https://rbcommons.com/
Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/
--- 
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/d/optout.

Re: RB 2.5 and Comment Categorization extension

[Ken Erickson]

I have the same problem (and it also was the same under 2.0.x version as 
well before I upgraded to 2.5.2).


On Tuesday, November 3, 2015 at 3:21:06 PM UTC-7, Paul Wolf wrote:
>
> I'm having problems getting this extension working on a new RB 2.5 
> installation.  I'm able to install the extension, enable it, and configure 
> some comment types.  However, when I go to add a review comment, the Type 
> 'select' has no values.  I've tried restarting my server but that didn't 
> help. Has anyone else had problems using this extension with RB 2.5?  
> Thanks.
>

-- 
Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: 
https://rbcommons.com/
Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/
--- 
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/d/optout.

Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

[Ken Erickson]

I just installed 2.5.2 on CentOS 7 for testing, other than comments below I 
haven't found anything.  
I do have a question, I installed the Comment Categorization extension and 
added 4 types to it but when I try to use it the list is empty on review 
comments?  It acted the same under 2.0 as well. 


On Friday, December 4, 2015 at 5:05:06 PM UTC-7, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>
> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
> entails.
>
> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really 
> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this 
> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
> feedback from people testing it).
>
> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
> and then running:
> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
> than 24).
>
> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>
> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
> next stable update, please help me out here.
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>

-- 
Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: 
https://rbcommons.com/
Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/
--- 
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/d/optout.

Re: member of the review group wont get emails unless they are in mailing list

[Sam]

Thank you David for your response.

We have groups that people are members and these groups are being used for 
review.

I have Reviewboard 2.5.1.1. Can you please guide me how to set for the 
option to send email to member of the groups since I have hard time to find 
the option.

-- 
Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: 
https://rbcommons.com/
Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/
--- 
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/d/optout.

Re: Upgrade from 1.6.22 to 2.5.2 fails, using PostgreSQL / Ubuntu 12.04.4

[Oliver Fasterling]

Attached are the dumps you requested. Thank you for looking into this.

Oliver

On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 4:09:05 PM UTC-6, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> Hi Oliver,
>
> This is definitely a different problem than the ones you found, but it is 
> strange.. The stored schema should have had some state in there for the new 
> FileDiffData table, but it's not there I guess.
>
> Can you send me a dump of the schema of your database (no content), and a 
> second dump containing the content of your django_project_version and 
> django_evolution tables?
>
> Christian
>
> -- 
> Christian Hammond - chri...@beanbaginc.com 
> Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
> Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Oliver Fasterling  > wrote:
>
> I attempted to upgrade our Reviewboard 1.6.22 to 2.5.2 (latest version). I 
> followed the steps documented in the upgrade guide, but failed with some 
> errors.
>
> I searched the mailing lists and found two articles which seem to match 
> the errors that I am getting. 
>
> https://goo.gl/VSbjds
>
> https://goo.gl/EpoghP
>
> The first article seems to isolate the culprit as a discrepancy of the 
> engine type found on MySQL tables, where there is a mix of MyISAM and 
> InnoDB types. Normalizing these to a single type fixed the issue. Found a 
> few other articles with that suggest the same fix. However, we use 
> PostgresSQL. From my understanding, there is a single engine type in 
> postgresql, and so the fix above does not apply.
>
> The second article talks about a bug in the Django Evolution package. I 
> ran the update command, but it was a moot action since it had already 
> downloaded the most recent version during the full upgrade.
>
> I considered running an upgrade to an earlier version, like 2.0.x but then 
> I found more articles where the upgrade also fails for them.
>
> Any assistance would be much appreciated.
>
> The output of my upgrade is shown below.
>
>
> root@reviewboard:~# easy_install -U ReviewBoard
> Searching for ReviewBoard
> Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/ReviewBoard/
> Best match: ReviewBoard 2.5.2
> Downloading https://
> pypi.python.org/packages/2.7/R/ReviewBoard/ReviewBoard-2.5.2-py2.7.egg#md5=58b2dbe01761a1f3d398381130e75d26
> Processing ReviewBoard-2.5.2-py2.7.egg
> creating /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.2-py2.
> 7.egg
> Extracting ReviewBoard-2.5.2-py2.7.egg to /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-
> packages
> Removing ReviewBoard 1.6.22.dev from easy-install.pth file
> Adding ReviewBoard 2.5.2 to easy-install.pth file
> Installing rbssh script to /usr/local/bin
> Installing rb-site script to /usr/local/bin
>
>
> Installed /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.2-py2.
> 7.egg
> Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.org/mirror/
> Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/Djblets/0.9/
> Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/django-evolution/0.7/
> Processing dependencies for ReviewBoard
> Searching for Whoosh>=2.6
> Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/Whoosh/
> Best match: Whoosh 2.7.0
> Downloading https://
> pypi.python.org/packages/source/W/Whoosh/Whoosh-2.7.0.zip#md5=7abfd970f16fadc7311960f3fa0bc7a9
> Processing Whoosh-2.7.0.zip
> Running Whoosh-2.7.0/setup.py -q bdist_egg --dist-dir /tmp/easy_install-
> 0wY0qe/Whoosh-2.7.0/egg-dist-tmp-yeD4wW
> warning: no files found matching '*.txt' under directory 'tests'
> warning: no files found matching '*.txt' under directory 'benchmark'
> warning: no files found matching '*.txt' under directory 'docs'
> warning: no files found matching '*.txt' under directory 'files'
> warning: no files found matching '*.py' under directory 'files'
> warning: no files found matching '*.jpg' under directory 'files'
> Adding Whoosh 2.7.0 to easy-install.pth file
>
>
> Installed /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/Whoosh-2.7.0-py2.7.egg
> Searching for Pygments>=1.6
> Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/Pygments/
> Best match: Pygments 2.0.2
> Downloading https://
> pypi.python.org/packages/source/P/Pygments/Pygments-2.0.2.tar.gz#md5=238587a1370d62405edabd0794b3ec4a
> Processing Pygments-2.0.2.tar.gz
> Running Pygments-2.0.2/setup.py -q bdist_egg --dist-dir /tmp/easy_install-
> MT7Fm3/Pygments-2.0.2/egg-dist-tmp-WGJV2n
> Removing Pygments 1.5 from easy-install.pth file
> Adding Pygments 2.0.2 to easy-install.pth file
> Installing pygmentize script to /usr/local/bin
>
>
> Installed /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/Pygments-2.0.2-py2.7.egg
> Searching for pycrypto>=2.6
> Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/pycrypto/
> Best match: pycrypto 2.6.1
> Downloading https://
> pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pycrypto/pycrypto-2.6.1.tar.gz#md5=55a61a054aa66812daf5161a0d5d7eda
> Processing pycrypto-2.6.1.tar.gz
> Running pycrypto-2.6.1/setup.py -q bdist_egg --dist-dir /tmp/easy_install-
> Hld6jQ/pycrypto-2.6.1/egg-dist-tmp-s2V09E
> warning: GMP or MPIR library not found; Not building 

Re: Downgrading Reviewboard 2.0RC2 -> 1.7.25

[Kevin Yin]

Thank you for your reply. I create a thread 
at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/reviewboard/EVEDKKQ2b78

On Sunday, December 6, 2015 at 12:27:20 PM UTC-8, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> Given how long ago that was, and how many releases ago, can you start a 
> new thread with the issue you're hitting, including versions and all error 
> output? That'll help keep discussion focused on your problem, and help us 
> offer recommendations.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Christian
>
> -- 
> Christian Hammond - chri...@beanbaginc.com 
> Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
> Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com
>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Kevin Yin  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> I ran into the same problem here. Did you ever figure out? Thanks!
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, May 10, 2014 at 5:14:27 AM UTC-7, Daniel Laird wrote:
>>>
>>> My original email was not very clear.
>>> On my backup server I want to remove the 2.0RC2 installation and get a 
>>> 1.7.x installation running.
>>> However I removed all the RB2.0RC2 files and then dropped the 
>>> reviewboard table from mysql database.
>>> I then did a clean installation of 1.7.25.
>>> I then imported the data from my old server (which was running 1.7.18) - 
>>> at this point I would have thought I would have a 'clean' installation.
>>> However the rb-site upgrade fails and when I visit the homepage I get 
>>> the errors below.
>>>
>>> It is almost as if there are some settings files that are stored someone 
>>> not in my installation directory and not in the mysql database.
>>> Might there be some files related to django evolutions that I have to 
>>> delete?
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, 9 May 2014 20:27:23 UTC+1, Christian Hammond wrote:

 Hi Dan,

 There are many reasons why a 2.0 database will not cleanly turn into a 
 1.7.x database. We stick certain data in new tables/columns that don't 
 exist in 1.7. We've migrated data from those older columns. 
 Django-Evolution has no concept of a downgrade and will likely just break 
 every future attempt to ever upgrade your database again.

 You're looking to keep the 2.0 data in 1.7.x? Any chance you can just 
 upgrade to 2.0 RC 3 and stick with that until 2.0 is out (very very soon)?

 Christian

 -- 
 Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com
 Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
 Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com


 On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Daniel Laird  wrote:

> All,
>
> Due to various issue my development server has to be re-purposed as 
> the main server.
> This has meant I have to revert from 2.0RC2 -> 1.7.25 (the latest 
> stable version).
>
> At this point I usually import the database and media files and all 
> works ok.
> However I get the following:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/core/handlers/base.py",
>  
> line 89, in get_response
> response = middleware_method(request)
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.7.25-py2.6.egg/reviewboard/accounts/middleware.py",
>  
> line 12, in process_request
> user = Profile.objects.get(user=request.user)
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/models/manager.py",
>  
> line 131, in get
> return self.get_query_set().get(*args, **kwargs)
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/models/query.py",
>  
> line 361, in get
> num = len(clone)
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/models/query.py",
>  
> line 85, in __len__
> self._result_cache = list(self.iterator())
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/models/query.py",
>  
> line 291, in iterator
> for row in compiler.results_iter():
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/models/sql/compiler.py",
>  
> line 763, in results_iter
> for rows in self.execute_sql(MULTI):
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/models/sql/compiler.py",
>  
> line 818, in execute_sql
> cursor.execute(sql, params)
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.4.12-py2.6.egg/django/db/backends/mysql/base.py",
>  
> line 114, in execute
> return self.cursor.execute(query, args)
>
>   File 
> "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/MySQL_python-1.2.3-py2.6-linux-x86_64.egg/MySQLdb/cursors.py",
>  
> line 174, in 

Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

[sean]

As it turns out the webpage reporting an older version was a non restarted 
fastcgi instance and unrelated to the webapi evolution.

On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 5:17:51 PM UTC+1, se...@m2mobi.com wrote:
>
> Hello Stephen,
>
> I've been patiently waiting for this for weeks now. Glad to see it's 
> getting close.
>
> Some issues I found upgrading from EPEL 2.0.18:
>
> The RPM requires: python-django-evolution >= 0.7.1
>
> ReviewBoard requires: django-evolution>=0.7.6,<=0.7.999
>
>
> *and during the rb-site upgrade I get the following message:*
>
> --  --
>
> Creating tables ...
>
> Creating table accounts_trophy
>
> Creating table attachments_fileattachmenthistory
>
> Creating table diffviewer_rawfilediffdata
>
> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget_repositories
>
> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget
>
> Creating table webapi_webapitoken
>
> Upgrading Review Board from 2.0.18 to 2.5.2
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for accounts.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for attachments.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for notifications.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for reviews.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>
> Adding baseline version for new models
>
> Evolutions in notifications baseline: webhooktarget_extra_state, 
> webhooktarget_extra_data_null
>
> Project signature has changed - an evolution is required
>
> Installing custom SQL ...
>
> Installing indexes ...
>
> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>
> Evolution successful.
>
> ---  ---
>
>
> *the next run reduces this to:*
>
>
> --  --
>
> Creating tables ...
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>
> Installing custom SQL ...
>
> Installing indexes ...
>
> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>
> No evolution required.
>
> ---  ---
>
>
> However many times I run the upgrade though, the 'unapplied evolutions for 
> webapi' persist and the webpage keeps reporting 2.0.18 as the version.
>
>
> System: CentOS 7
>
> Webserver: Nginx
>
> On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 1:05:06 AM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>
>> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
>> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
>> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
>> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
>> entails.
>>
>> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really 
>> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this 
>> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
>> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
>> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
>> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
>> feedback from people testing it).
>>
>> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
>> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
>> and then running:
>> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
>> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
>> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
>> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
>> than 24).
>>
>> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
>> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
>> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
>> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>>
>> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
>> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
>> next stable update, please help me out here.
>>
>>
>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>>
>

-- 
Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: 
https://rbcommons.com/
Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/
--- 
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/d/optout.