Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-16 Thread Peter Hodgson
Sounds good to me, thank you. On Friday, 15 December 2017 22:27:34 UTC, Christian Hammond wrote: > > That was exactly the problem. We're no longer normalizing the casing at > the right place. We'll have a fix in for the next point release (aiming for > Tuesday). > > Christian > > On Fri, Dec

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-15 Thread Christian Hammond
That was exactly the problem. We're no longer normalizing the casing at the right place. We'll have a fix in for the next point release (aiming for Tuesday). Christian On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Christian Hammond wrote: > It very well could be. I’ll investigate

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-15 Thread Christian Hammond
It very well could be. I’ll investigate that possibility. Christian On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:11 Peter Hodgson wrote: > Hi Christian, > > Interesting, okay, > > I'm seeing the issue across the board everywhere an avatar is expected, > the dashboard, infoboxes, and

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-15 Thread Peter Hodgson
Hi Christian, Interesting, okay, I'm seeing the issue across the board everywhere an avatar is expected, the dashboard, infoboxes, and the user page itself. Instead of the expected gravatar avatar I see the default white silhouette on a grey circular background. Previous examples

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-14 Thread Christian Hammond
Hi Peter, The LDAP code hasn't changed between the releases. When logging in via LDAP for the first time, a local User entry is created with details coming from LDAP, but those details aren't re-queried from LDAP later, so a user that existed in 2.5.17 should have the same details as one in

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-14 Thread Peter Hodgson
Sorry to be so noisy Christian, I'm now seeing problems with gravatar sourced images. The switch to v3x has moved to use a srcset which makes sense but the actual links being used have changed. At a wild guess it looks like it's related to ldap use, possibly different fields being used to

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-13 Thread Peter Hodgson
That makes perfect sense. The reason I'd wanted to set it at install time is I've been extending a dockerised version, but, as you point out the domain method is part of the site_config table so gets migrated with the rest of the data. This'll work perfectly. I'm happy, Thanks again, Peter

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-12 Thread Christian Hammond
Glad it worked! There's no way to set this during install today, but it's something we should add. You can set it automatically using the set-siteconfig management command: rb-site manage /path/to/sitedir set-siteconfig -- --key=site_domain_method --value=https Hopefully you aren't needing

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-12 Thread Peter Hodgson
Hi Christian, Thanks very much, that was it exactly, the general settings page had the url as http. The avatars are now working great. Is that setting generated from the --domain-name parameter of rb-site install? I presume there's no way to set that on install? Thanks again, Peter On

Re: Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-09 Thread Christian Hammond
Hi Peter, Thanks! This looks like it might be setting-related, so let's start there. Can you tell me if the Admin UI -> General Settings page lists the URL of the server as using http or https? And is Media URL using a relative path or a URL (and if so, is that using http or https)? Any

Uploaded Avatar issues with http/https in RB 3.0.1

2017-12-08 Thread Peter Hodgson
Hi guys, Congrats on getting v3 out. I'm a big fan of ReviewBoard, it's certainly made my life easier and v3 looks great. An issue I've having is uploaded avatar images not being shown whilst using ReviewBoard through https as they are linked as http. Chrome reports them as Mixed Content: