I'm glad to hear it! Thanks for letting me know :) Sorry for the trouble
before.
Christian
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 10:42 AM tw bert wrote:
> Hi Christian, thank you, that worked flawlessly.
> We considered pip installing bleach, but like to keep stuff vanilla where
> possible.
> Fixed.
> For
Hi Christian, thank you, that worked flawlessly.
We considered pip installing bleach, but like to keep stuff vanilla where
possible.
Fixed.
For completeness, I've attached the output logs of pip install -U
ReviewBoard==3.0.23 and the rb-site upgrade.
On Thursday, 6 May 2021 at 03:16:10 UTC+2
Just put out the 3.0.23 release, so you should be able to upgrade and be
good. Sorry about that. There was a lingering but unnecessary usage of a
dependency that we had removed in 3.0.22.
Christian
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 5:58 PM Christian Hammond
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Looks like something went
Hi,
Looks like something went wrong with the release. You can get around this
temporarily by doing:
pip install bleach_allowlist
We'll put out a fixed build tonight.
Christian
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 8:42 AM tw bert wrote:
> RB breaks when upgrading, we reverted to backup.
>
> Any clue?
RB breaks when upgrading, we reverted to backup.
Any clue? Previous upgrades always went fine.
pip install -U ReviewBoard==3.0.22
(ok)
root@srv-flux-dev-01:/# rb-site upgrade /var/www/reviews.XXX.XXX.com
WARNING:py.warnings:/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/paramiko/transport.py:33:
UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when
upgrading to 1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out
solutions for some of you, but not all.
I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out solutions, find the
common
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading to
1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out solutions for
some of you, but not all.
I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out solutions, find the common
cases, and figure out
database upgrade issues before when upgrading to
1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out solutions for
some of you, but not all.
I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out solutions, find the common
cases, and figure out a fix. Today, I have one that should fix
try it again on a pristine 1.5.5 database.
--Steve
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:16:03 AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading to
1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out solutions for
some
2013 19:08:48 +
I may try it again on a pristine 1.5.5 database.
--Steve
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:16:03 AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading to 1.7
(or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed
-packages/webkit-1.0',
'/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages']
Server time:Fri, 1 Mar 2013 19:08:48 +
I may try it again on a pristine 1.5.5 database.
--Steve
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:16:03 AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade
: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 19:08:48 +
I may try it again on a pristine 1.5.5 database.
--Steve
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:16:03 AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading to
1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6
, February 27, 2013 12:16:03 AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading
to 1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out solutions for
some of you, but not all.
I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out
/python2.6/site-packages']
Server time:Fri, 1 Mar 2013 19:08:48 +
I may try it again on a pristine 1.5.5 database.
--Steve
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:16:03 AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading
AM UTC-8, Christian Hammond
wrote:
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading
to 1.7 (or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out solutions
for
some of you, but not all.
I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out solutions, find
Hi everyone,
So some of you have hit database upgrade issues before when upgrading to 1.7
(or, in some cases, 1.6). We've managed to figure out solutions for some of
you, but not all.
I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out solutions, find the common cases,
and figure out a fix. Today
Since upgrading to 1.7.1 all new reviews have been running into this issue
(backtrace below).
I did some digging into the traceback that was generated and found the
following:
reviewboard/scmtools/hg.py line 215, the version variable being passed to
parse_version is None.
This is coming from
Hi Brian,
Just to sanity check, when you run that manually, is it also using Python
2.6?
It seems weird that we'd be able to import that file but not get the
version. In my copy here, it's nothing but a straight-forward variable
assignment in a file called __version__.py.
It'd be interesting to
Correct, Python 2.6.6.
Everything else works, is also the weird thing. I hardcoded a version
number if it came back as None (I guess I could add some logging to that if
statement too) and it just keeps going.
It generates the diffs fine, all the other integration options seem to
work. So I
Hi guys,
I wanted to condense the three active threads on database upgrade issues.
The things you all have in common is that you're upgrading from older
versions using an older Django Evolution that all had a bug causing blank
hinted schema evolutions, which could cause problems when upgrading
Hi Christian,
Here is what the output for the version
Python 2.7.1+ (r271:86832, Apr 11 2011, 18:13:53)
[GCC 4.5.2] on linux2
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
(InteractiveConsole)
from django_evolution.models import Version
print Version.objects.all()
[Version:
Upon further testing, it seems something has changed with this release and
LDAP authentication.
I was able to log into RB with a local user, however all LDAP users can not
log in. Do you know what has changed with the LDAP backend authentication?
The RB log shows the following message
Updates:
Labels: Component-Deployment
Comment #1 on issue 2810 by trowb...@gmail.com: Upgrade issues from 1.6.3
to 1.6.14
http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2810
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
I'm getting the following error while trying to upgrade my 1.5.7 install
to the newer 1.6.5 package during 'rb-site upgrade'.
I am using django_evolution 0.6.7. This error is resulting in an outage
situation, so I could really use some help quickly :(
File /usr/bin/rb-site, line 9, in module
Hi Stephen,
Hmm, that's concerning. My upgrade simulations aren't reproducing that.
The same issue should be hit for any 1.6 release.
Is this for the packages or FedoraHosted?
It almost sounds like the syncdb didn't set up the site app. We're there any
warnings? Do you see those in the
On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 11:25 -0700, Christian Hammond wrote:
Hi Stephen,
Hmm, that's concerning. My upgrade simulations aren't reproducing that.
The same issue should be hit for any 1.6 release.
Is this for the packages or FedoraHosted?
This is happening from the RPMs I created for EPEL
It's your settings_local. Overriding that entirely is a recipe for disaster, as
we add to that. If things are missing (the site app among a few in this case),
things will blow up.
You probably should just dynamically take what's in there, convert to a list,
and insert your models at one index
Maybe I'm getting mixed up between 1.6.x and 1.7. It could be that we only
added site in 1.6.
We can get that change into 1.6.x. I was hesitant to make too many more
changes to 1.6.x, but we'll be doing a larger 1.6.x release hopefully this
week, so I'll try to remember to slip that one in.
On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 12:01 -0700, Christian Hammond wrote:
Maybe I'm getting mixed up between 1.6.x and 1.7. It could be that we
only added site in 1.6.
We can get that change into 1.6.x. I was hesitant to make too many
more changes to 1.6.x, but we'll be doing a larger 1.6.x release
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Stephen Gallagher
step...@gallagherhome.com wrote:
On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 12:01 -0700, Christian Hammond wrote:
Maybe I'm getting mixed up between 1.6.x and 1.7. It could be that we
only added site in 1.6.
We can get that change into 1.6.x. I was
Thanks a lot! Removing this tool solved the issues. I've added it a
year ago trying to setup demo and forgot about that.
-- Sergey
On Oct 13, 8:41 am, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote:
It sounds like you have the localfile scmtool installed in your database,
which is really only for
It sounds like you have the localfile scmtool installed in your database,
which is really only for testing and hasn't been maintained in forever. You
need to remove the database entry for that in scmtools_tool.
Were you using this SCMTool for anything?
Christian
--
Christian Hammond -
Hi there,
Upgrading from an svn install I'm also hitting that one ...
How did you solved it ? manually editing the database ?
Regards,
Benoit
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 20:12, Chris Clarkchris.cl...@ingres.com wrote:
Christian Hammond wrote:
This was due to a bug I'm currently fixing. I should
I went to the admin part and looked for something that looks like
'reviews_reviewrequestdraft.changedesc_id' visited the right page
(http://server/admin/db/reviews/reviewrequestdraft/), did nothing,
saved, and it's gone ...
thanks anyway for pointing the right database ...
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009
I've just moved to rev 1623 in trunk (I was at 1519). I do like the new
manual upgrade required screen that pops up (settings.py has been
updated to change the location for htdocs/media/uploaded/images). Very
slick and should saves lots of admin hair pulling :-)
However when I first loaded
Hey Chris.
This was due to a bug I'm currently fixing. I should have it in in about 15
mins.
We've moved to using rb-site for site installations recently, and a recent
change to settings.py has it look for htdocs in the parent directory of
wherever settings_local.py is stored. This is due to the
36 matches
Mail list logo
