Re: In search of help packaging ReviewBoard 3.0.14 for Gentoo Linux, problem when running server, probably something simple I overlooked.

[Christian Hammond]

Hi Eric,

Yeah, it's cyclical. rbintegrations needs the Review Board source to build
(which is why Review Board does *not* depend on rbintegrations at `setup.py
develop` time), but we want to auto-install rbintegrations when installing
Review Board, which is why Review Board has a dependency on it. This is not
great, but since *most* consume our packages from our own builds, most
people don't have to worry about it. We opted to keep rbintegrations
separate so that we could maintain it across Review Board releases, without
forcing people to upgrade Review Board to get, say, the latest Slack fixes.

Christian


On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 2:27 PM 'Eric Johnson' via Review Board Community <
reviewboard@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:12 PM Stephen Gallagher <
> step...@gallagherhome.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:31 PM 'Eric Johnson' via Review Board
>> Community  wrote:
>> > The one challenge I observed with the ReviewBoard packages was that
>> rbintegrations included a small handfule of binary files that I needed to
>> copy over and add to the unpacked source.
>> >
>> > As for why my changes were not working when I wrote you initially, it
>> appears that I forgot to reset my virtual machine for testing purposes, and
>> was instead dealing with incremental changes, and it didn't work. When I
>> reset my VM, and applied the upgrade to the Gentoo packages on a "clean"
>> install of the 2.5.18 version, the end-result worked just fine.
>> >
>> > Thanks for your help. Your questions prodded me to keep looking, to
>> make sure I could properly describe the problem, and that got me to find my
>> mistake.
>> >
>>
>> For what it's worth, you might find my Fedora packaging to be useful
>> in guiding you here. Realistically, you probably want to do what I did
>> and just bundle the rbintegrations tarball with the ReviewBoard build.
>>
>> The Fedora packaging is here:
>> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ReviewBoard/tree/3.0
>
>
> I almost had to go down that path. Fortunately, I was able to keep them
> separate. They have an oddly cyclical relationship. As near as I can tell,
> in the source, each depends on the existence of the other in setup.py .
> Fortunately, when packaging for Gentoo, I simply removed all the setup
> activities (making it equivalent to the whl files), which breaks the
> dependency cycle.
>
> Eric.
>
> --
> 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
> "Review Board Community" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CANu9%3DNc-dqF66agep9dQgsqG3RH%3DYttkutKjwd6tnYPfXE_PRQ%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>


-- 
Christian Hammond
President/CEO of Beanbag 
Makers of Review Board 

-- 
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 
"Review Board Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CAE7VndnbKYDH5vq2i_%2B_WE3840rTNLL_3Jig1Df8AiiFLL0nHg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: In search of help packaging ReviewBoard 3.0.14 for Gentoo Linux, problem when running server, probably something simple I overlooked.

['Eric Johnson' via Review Board Community]

Hi Stephen,

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:12 PM Stephen Gallagher 
wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:31 PM 'Eric Johnson' via Review Board
> Community  wrote:
> > The one challenge I observed with the ReviewBoard packages was that
> rbintegrations included a small handfule of binary files that I needed to
> copy over and add to the unpacked source.
> >
> > As for why my changes were not working when I wrote you initially, it
> appears that I forgot to reset my virtual machine for testing purposes, and
> was instead dealing with incremental changes, and it didn't work. When I
> reset my VM, and applied the upgrade to the Gentoo packages on a "clean"
> install of the 2.5.18 version, the end-result worked just fine.
> >
> > Thanks for your help. Your questions prodded me to keep looking, to make
> sure I could properly describe the problem, and that got me to find my
> mistake.
> >
>
> For what it's worth, you might find my Fedora packaging to be useful
> in guiding you here. Realistically, you probably want to do what I did
> and just bundle the rbintegrations tarball with the ReviewBoard build.
>
> The Fedora packaging is here:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ReviewBoard/tree/3.0


I almost had to go down that path. Fortunately, I was able to keep them
separate. They have an oddly cyclical relationship. As near as I can tell,
in the source, each depends on the existence of the other in setup.py .
Fortunately, when packaging for Gentoo, I simply removed all the setup
activities (making it equivalent to the whl files), which breaks the
dependency cycle.

Eric.

-- 
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 
"Review Board Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CANu9%3DNc-dqF66agep9dQgsqG3RH%3DYttkutKjwd6tnYPfXE_PRQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: In search of help packaging ReviewBoard 3.0.14 for Gentoo Linux, problem when running server, probably something simple I overlooked.

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:31 PM 'Eric Johnson' via Review Board
Community  wrote:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> Thanks so much for the response! As near as I can tell, ReviewBoard "just 
> works" for the teams that use it here, so we're grateful for the quality work.
>
> The issue appears to be solved at this point, and it looks like operator 
> error. More details below.
>
> On Friday, May 31, 2019 at 12:58:31 AM UTC-7, Christian Hammond wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> Can you verify that rbintegrations was also packaged and that its extension 
>> is enabled?
>>
>>
>> We really don't advise installing from our tarballs, as we build the eggs 
>> and wheels with a particular setup to ensure they're packaged just right. It 
>> is of course possible to build with tarballs, but there are differences. The 
>> process of building eggs/wheels can result in changes to the required 
>> dependencies and to some of the build steps. It'd be best if the "source" 
>> could be the wheel, just extracted.
>
>
> Unfortunately, I don't see that installing from the "whl" files or the "egg" 
> files is really used at all on Gentoo. It is fairly straightforward to make 
> sure I get the dependencies right, since I had to encode the dependencies 
> into the Gentoo package ebuild files. As for getting the files right, a 
> recursive compare of the pip install vs. the Gentoo install shows that they 
> end up the same with the packages I created.
>
> The one challenge I observed with the ReviewBoard packages was that 
> rbintegrations included a small handfule of binary files that I needed to 
> copy over and add to the unpacked source.
>
> As for why my changes were not working when I wrote you initially, it appears 
> that I forgot to reset my virtual machine for testing purposes, and was 
> instead dealing with incremental changes, and it didn't work. When I reset my 
> VM, and applied the upgrade to the Gentoo packages on a "clean" install of 
> the 2.5.18 version, the end-result worked just fine.
>
> Thanks for your help. Your questions prodded me to keep looking, to make sure 
> I could properly describe the problem, and that got me to find my mistake.
>

For what it's worth, you might find my Fedora packaging to be useful
in guiding you here. Realistically, you probably want to do what I did
and just bundle the rbintegrations tarball with the ReviewBoard build.

The Fedora packaging is here:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ReviewBoard/tree/3.0

-- 
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 
"Review Board Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CAFAoxCmdOGs_7H1ymKJmRW_aQ8qmEk1dOfGT6BN429yD1d%3DKEA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: In search of help packaging ReviewBoard 3.0.14 for Gentoo Linux, problem when running server, probably something simple I overlooked.

['Eric Johnson' via Review Board Community]

Hi Christian,

Thanks so much for the response! As near as I can tell, ReviewBoard "just 
works" for the teams that use it here, so we're grateful for the quality 
work.

The issue appears to be solved at this point, and it looks like operator 
error. More details below.

On Friday, May 31, 2019 at 12:58:31 AM UTC-7, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> Can you verify that rbintegrations was also packaged and that its 
> extension is enabled?
>

> We really don't advise installing from our tarballs, as we build the eggs 
> and wheels with a particular setup to ensure they're packaged just right. 
> It is of course possible to build with tarballs, but there are differences. 
> The process of building eggs/wheels can result in changes to the required 
> dependencies and to some of the build steps. It'd be best if the "source" 
> could be the wheel, just extracted.
>

Unfortunately, I don't see that installing from the "whl" files or the 
"egg" files is really used at all on Gentoo. It is fairly straightforward 
to make sure I get the dependencies right, since I had to encode the 
dependencies into the Gentoo package ebuild files. As for getting the files 
right, a recursive compare of the pip install vs. the Gentoo install shows 
that they end up the same with the packages I created.

The one challenge I observed with the ReviewBoard packages was that 
rbintegrations included a small handfule of binary files that I needed to 
copy over and add to the unpacked source.

As for why my changes were not working when I wrote you initially, it 
appears that I forgot to reset my virtual machine for testing purposes, and 
was instead dealing with incremental changes, and it didn't work. When I 
reset my VM, and applied the upgrade to the Gentoo packages on a "clean" 
install of the 2.5.18 version, the end-result worked just fine.

Thanks for your help. Your questions prodded me to keep looking, to make 
sure I could properly describe the problem, and that got me to find my 
mistake.

Eric.

 

>
> Christian
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 2:52 PM 'Eric Johnson' via Review Board Community <
> revie...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
>> Mostly, I've managed to get quite far with packaging ReviewBoard for 
>> Linux. Although I don't know much about the Gentoo packaging system, it has 
>> turned out to be easier than I feared.
>>
>> We're currently running ReviewBoard 2.5.18, installed using the portage 
>> package manager. So we have done this packaging for 2.5.18. I tried this 
>> upgrade previously, but was stymied and gave up. This time I pushed ahead 
>> after understanding a better approach.
>>
>> I've gotten *almost* all the way to a successful 3.0.14 install of 
>> ReviewBoard. I've got it up and running, but one thing is going wrong, and 
>> I haven't figured out why, just yet. When I say I've got it up and running, 
>> that means that I've been able to perform rb-site upgrade on all the 
>> instances, login works, and I can browse the reviews. I can access the 
>> administrative pages (since I'm an admin). However, when I click on an 
>> individual review, I get an error:
>>
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/handlers/base.py", 
>> line 137, in get_response
>> response = response.render()
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/response.py", 
>> line 105, in render
>> self.content = self.rendered_content
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/response.py", 
>> line 82, in rendered_content
>> content = template.render(context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 140, in render
>> return self._render(context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 134, in _render
>> return self.nodelist.render(context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 840, in render
>> bit = self.render_node(node, context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 854, in render_node
>> return node.render(context)
>>   File 
>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/loader_tags.py", line 
>> 123, in render
>> return compiled_parent._render(context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 134, in _render
>> return self.nodelist.render(context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 840, in render
>> bit = self.render_node(node, context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 854, in render_node
>> return node.render(context)
>>   File 
>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/loader_tags.py", line 
>> 123, in render
>> return compiled_parent._render(context)
>>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line 
>> 134, in _render
>> return 

Re: In search of help packaging ReviewBoard 3.0.14 for Gentoo Linux, problem when running server, probably something simple I overlooked.

[Christian Hammond]

Hi Eric,

Can you verify that rbintegrations was also packaged and that its extension
is enabled?

We really don't advise installing from our tarballs, as we build the eggs
and wheels with a particular setup to ensure they're packaged just right.
It is of course possible to build with tarballs, but there are differences.
The process of building eggs/wheels can result in changes to the required
dependencies and to some of the build steps. It'd be best if the "source"
could be the wheel, just extracted.

Christian

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 2:52 PM 'Eric Johnson' via Review Board Community <
reviewboard@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> Mostly, I've managed to get quite far with packaging ReviewBoard for
> Linux. Although I don't know much about the Gentoo packaging system, it has
> turned out to be easier than I feared.
>
> We're currently running ReviewBoard 2.5.18, installed using the portage
> package manager. So we have done this packaging for 2.5.18. I tried this
> upgrade previously, but was stymied and gave up. This time I pushed ahead
> after understanding a better approach.
>
> I've gotten *almost* all the way to a successful 3.0.14 install of
> ReviewBoard. I've got it up and running, but one thing is going wrong, and
> I haven't figured out why, just yet. When I say I've got it up and running,
> that means that I've been able to perform rb-site upgrade on all the
> instances, login works, and I can browse the reviews. I can access the
> administrative pages (since I'm an admin). However, when I click on an
> individual review, I get an error:
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/handlers/base.py",
> line 137, in get_response
> response = response.render()
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/response.py",
> line 105, in render
> self.content = self.rendered_content
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/response.py",
> line 82, in rendered_content
> content = template.render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 140, in render
> return self._render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 134, in _render
> return self.nodelist.render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 840, in render
> bit = self.render_node(node, context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 854, in render_node
> return node.render(context)
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/loader_tags.py", line
> 123, in render
> return compiled_parent._render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 134, in _render
> return self.nodelist.render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 840, in render
> bit = self.render_node(node, context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 854, in render_node
> return node.render(context)
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/loader_tags.py", line
> 123, in render
> return compiled_parent._render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 134, in _render
> return self.nodelist.render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 840, in render
> bit = self.render_node(node, context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 854, in render_node
> return node.render(context)
>   File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
> 1125, in render
> return func(*resolved_args, **resolved_kwargs)
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
> line 295, in load_extensions_css
> _render_css_bundle))
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
> line 265, in _get_extension_bundles
> yield renderer(context, extension, bundle_name)
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
> line 143, in _render_css_bundle
> name, 'CSS')
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
> line 117, in _render_bundle
> return node_cls('"%s"' % extension.get_bundle_id(name)).render(context)
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pipeline/templatetags/pipeline.py",
> line 140, in render
> return self.render_compressed(package, package_name, 'css')
>   File
> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
> line 54, in render_compressed
> rendered = self.render_compressed_output(*args, **kwargs)
>   File
> 

In search of help packaging ReviewBoard 3.0.14 for Gentoo Linux, problem when running server, probably something simple I overlooked.

['Eric Johnson' via Review Board Community]

Mostly, I've managed to get quite far with packaging ReviewBoard for Linux.
Although I don't know much about the Gentoo packaging system, it has turned
out to be easier than I feared.

We're currently running ReviewBoard 2.5.18, installed using the portage
package manager. So we have done this packaging for 2.5.18. I tried this
upgrade previously, but was stymied and gave up. This time I pushed ahead
after understanding a better approach.

I've gotten *almost* all the way to a successful 3.0.14 install of
ReviewBoard. I've got it up and running, but one thing is going wrong, and
I haven't figured out why, just yet. When I say I've got it up and running,
that means that I've been able to perform rb-site upgrade on all the
instances, login works, and I can browse the reviews. I can access the
administrative pages (since I'm an admin). However, when I click on an
individual review, I get an error:

Traceback (most recent call last):

  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/handlers/base.py",
line 137, in get_response
response = response.render()
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/response.py",
line 105, in render
self.content = self.rendered_content
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/response.py",
line 82, in rendered_content
content = template.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
140, in render
return self._render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
134, in _render
return self.nodelist.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
840, in render
bit = self.render_node(node, context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
854, in render_node
return node.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/loader_tags.py",
line 123, in render
return compiled_parent._render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
134, in _render
return self.nodelist.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
840, in render
bit = self.render_node(node, context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
854, in render_node
return node.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/loader_tags.py",
line 123, in render
return compiled_parent._render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
134, in _render
return self.nodelist.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
840, in render
bit = self.render_node(node, context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
854, in render_node
return node.render(context)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/template/base.py", line
1125, in render
return func(*resolved_args, **resolved_kwargs)
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
line 295, in load_extensions_css
_render_css_bundle))
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
line 265, in _get_extension_bundles
yield renderer(context, extension, bundle_name)
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
line 143, in _render_css_bundle
name, 'CSS')
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
line 117, in _render_bundle
return node_cls('"%s"' % extension.get_bundle_id(name)).render(context)
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pipeline/templatetags/pipeline.py",
line 140, in render
return self.render_compressed(package, package_name, 'css')
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/djblets/extensions/templatetags/djblets_extensions.py",
line 54, in render_compressed
rendered = self.render_compressed_output(*args, **kwargs)
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pipeline/templatetags/pipeline.py",
line 82, in render_compressed_output
return method(package, package.output_filename)
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pipeline/templatetags/pipeline.py",
line 147, in render_css
'url': mark_safe(staticfiles_storage.url(path))
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/contrib/staticfiles/storage.py",
line 139, in url
hashed_name = self.hashed_name(clean_name).replace('\\', '/')
  File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/django/contrib/staticfiles/storage.py",
line 96, in hashed_name
(clean_name, self))

ValueError: The file
'ext/rbintegrations.extension.RBIntegrationsExtension/css/fields.min.css'
could not be found with .

Note that this appears to be the same as:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/reviewboard/FSzcHz-OaDg/89BXxRFDBAAJ
... but that thread in the mailing