Strange behaviour after updating to 1.6

Hello, I decided to update from 1.5.4 to 1.6. While the update procedure seems to have ran fine [1], my rb site stopped working correctly. First, I was getting this error [2] whenever I tried to add a comment to a review request. Then, after cleaning the browser's cache, I started receiving JS

Re: Strange behaviour after updating to 1.6

Hi Olek, That backtrace shows that you're still running Review Board 1.5.4. Did you restart your web server? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:15 AM, Olek Piekarz

Re: Strange behaviour after updating to 1.6

Hi, Thank you for the fast reply. Yes, I restarted it, more than once actually. I also flushed memcache. Olek -- 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/

Re: Strange behaviour after updating to 1.6

Okay, the problem appears to be this: You installed Review Board (and Django and all other accompanying dependencies) in /usr/lib/python2.5/..., as is the default for easy_install. However, your Apache is running off of a different Review Board/Python install in /opt/reviewboard/lib/python2.5/...

Queries:Postreview.py [Perforce]

Hi, 1. Does post-review tools has any restriction to upload some restricted number of files to reviewboard, if changelist contain more then 1000 files will it effect the performance of Reviewbaord. 2. It might possible that user had send code for review and after changes are approve he may

RBTools: wrong repository path

Hi folks, I don't understand how post-review extracts the path of the repository. Ex: $ ./bin/post-review ... The repository path ssh://server/srv/git/vendor/rbtools.git is not in the list of known repositories on the server. Right, the repository is path + repo_name

Re: Failure upgrading to 1.6

I would recommend to do a check by the software to verify permissions on DB before performing the upgrade, if the requirements are missing it can inform the user to get the requirements done before it performs the upgrade. Also, It can avoid database getting into a fuzzy state (neither downgraded

Problem with WSGI on fresh install

Hello everybody. I install a new Review Board 1.6 on one of my server, but I have a problem after setup. I install RB on an already existing Apache virtualhost and merge manually RB conf with existing one. After restarting Apache, if I access to http://myHost/reviews/, I get a 404 RB error

Problem with WSGI on fresh install

Hello everybody. I install a new Review Board 1.6 on one of my server, but I have a problem after setup. I install RB on an already existing Apache virtualhost and merge manually RB conf with existing one. After restarting Apache, if I access to http://myHost/reviews/, I get a 404 RB error :

Fedora 2.6 Installation

I followed the instructions to install ReviewBoard on Linux but I cannot get it to work. I create a linux server where I installed all the requisites. I'm working in the apache configuration right now and I cannot make it to work. This is a test server. My apache server runs as root. I defined

Re: Strange behaviour after updating to 1.6

I finally have it up and running, after preparing pretty much a fresh install. Thank you very much Christian! Cheers, Olek -- 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/

Re: RBTools: wrong repository path

Hi Sebastien, The best thing to do is to move to named repositories, by creating a .reviewboardrc and doing: REPOSITORY = my repo name Where my repo name is the exact name for the repository entry in Review Board. That way, it won't have to do path comparisons. Christian -- Christian

Re: Fedora 2.6 Installation

Hi, Can you show the resulting Apache configuration? Also, is fastcgi installed on your system? (We heavily recommend wsgi, btw, as we've seen issues in the past with fastcgi in general.) Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware,

Re: Queries:Postreview.py [Perforce]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:28 AM, NSJ nileshj...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 1. Does post-review tools has any restriction to upload some restricted number of files to reviewboard, if changelist contain more then 1000 files will it effect the performance of Reviewbaord. We don't specifically

Re: Failure upgrading to 1.6

Thanks for the help. I granted INDEX to user rb. I'm not sure why I would have granted USAGE, which is what it was. Anyhow, problem solved. Thanks again. On Sep 6, 2:19 pm, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Kannaiyan Natesan gbpnk...@gmail.comwrote:

Re : Re: Problem with WSGI on fresh install

Thanks for your answer. Other stuff is just for Tomcat proxy Location / Order Deny,Allow Allow from 127.0.0.1 192.168.0.0/24 Deny from all /Location ProxyPreserveHost On ProxyPass/nexus

Re: Fedora 2.6 Installation

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:00 AM, MonicaS castaneda.mon...@gmail.com wrote: This is a test server. My apache server runs as root. httpd should run as user 'apache' on Fedora. The rpm installed with yum will install it that way, don't change it, and don't install apache httpd from source. I

Re: Issue 1795 in reviewboard: using --submit-as with post-review causes generated mails to be from original submitter

Comment #3 on issue 1795 by michakel...@gmail.com: using --submit-as with post-review causes generated mails to be from original submitter http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=1795 Is this a post-review issue? We run RB 1.5 beta 2, and see the same behavior. But the

Re: Issue 2269 in reviewboard: reviewers can review uploaded file just like diff file

Comment #2 on issue 2269 by wangxiao...@gmail.com: reviewers can review uploaded file just like diff file http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2269 all files(.txt .java .c .h .php .js .css .xml .py .sh .pl etc) expect Binary files and pictures -- You received this

Issue 2272 in reviewboard: Automatic Update of Chagne Number in ReveiwBoard

Status: New Owner: Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium New issue 2272 by jagtar.c...@gmail.com: Automatic Update of Chagne Number in ReveiwBoard http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2272 * NOTE: Do not post confidential information in this bug report. * * If you

Re: Issue 2272 in reviewboard: Automatic Update of Chagne Number in ReveiwBoard

Comment #1 on issue 2272 by chip...@gmail.com: Automatic Update of Chagne Number in ReveiwBoard http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2272 The change number can only be updated today through the API, as giving users the option to specify their own change number can actually

Re: Issue 1795 in reviewboard: using --submit-as with post-review causes generated mails to be from original submitter

Updates: Labels: -Type-Defect Type-Enhancement Component-EMail Comment #4 on issue 1795 by chip...@gmail.com: using --submit-as with post-review causes generated mails to be from original submitter http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=1795 It's part RBTools, part

Issue 2273 in reviewboard: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6

Status: New Owner: Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium New issue 2273 by kofem...@googlemail.com: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6 http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2273 * NOTE: Do not post confidential information in this bug report.

Re: Issue 2273 in reviewboard: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6

Updates: Status: NeedInfo Labels: -Priority-Medium Priority-Critical Milestone-Release1.6.x Component-Dashboard Comment #1 on issue 2273 by chip...@gmail.com: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6

Re: Issue 2273 in reviewboard: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6

Comment #2 on issue 2273 by kofem...@googlemail.com: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6 http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2273 I run Mysql 5.0.51a on debian lenny. fixreviewcounts did the job. Thanks. Attachments: Screenshot-My

Re: Issue 2273 in reviewboard: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6

Comment #3 on issue 2273 by chip...@gmail.com: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6 http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2273 We thought we had this nailed down in the betas, but alas... We call fixreviewcounts on upgrade, which should have

Re: Issue 2273 in reviewboard: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6

Comment #4 on issue 2273 by kofem...@googlemail.com: number of incomming/outgoing reviews reset after migration to 1.6 http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2273 It looks like the group counts were correct though? Given the difference in screenshots. So the broken fields

Re: Issue 2268 in reviewboard: My incoming reviews have a negative number

Comment #6 on issue 2268 by manjunat...@gmail.com: My incoming reviews have a negative number http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2268 When I upgraded from 1.5 to 1.6, i got -1 for Outgoing Reviews and zero for all the other case (example Outgoing Reviews). When I ran

Re: Issue 2268 in reviewboard: My incoming reviews have a negative number

Comment #7 on issue 2268 by manjunat...@gmail.com: My incoming reviews have a negative number http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2268 When I upgraded from 1.5 to 1.6, i got -1 for Outgoing Reviews and zero for all the other case (example All My Requests). When I ran

Re: Issue 1722 in reviewboard: UTF-16 file from Perforce not displayed

Comment #4 on issue 1722 by joshua.m...@gmail.com: UTF-16 file from Perforce not displayed http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=1722 It just shows This is a binary file, contents cannot be displayed or whatever it usually does when encountering a binary file. -- You

Re: Issue 2268 in reviewboard: My incoming reviews have a negative number

Comment #8 on issue 2268 by trowb...@gmail.com: My incoming reviews have a negative number http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2268 Issue 2273 has been merged into this issue. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues

Re: Issue 2274 in reviewboard: add Outgouing link to the dashboard

Updates: Status: WontFix Comment #1 on issue 2274 by chip...@gmail.com: add Outgouing link to the dashboard http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2274 Thanks, but this isn't how we'd like to tackle this. Rather, the idea is to have a drop-down arrow besides My

Issue 2275 in reviewboard: Defect in the Bugs field

Status: New Owner: Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium New issue 2275 by gdinsh...@gmail.com: Defect in the Bugs field http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2275 * NOTE: Do not post confidential information in this bug report. * * If you need immediate support, please

Re: Issue 2275 in reviewboard: Defect in the Bugs field

Updates: Status: UserError Comment #1 on issue 2275 by trowb...@gmail.com: Defect in the Bugs field http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2275 This is as expected. The bugs field is not supposed to be a text description, but rather a list of bug IDs to link. -- You

Re: Issue 2184 in reviewboard: Mercurial rename support: Pure file renames with *no actual changes* to the file fails with Diff did not apply cleanly

Comment #2 on issue 2184 by carl.van...@gmail.com: Mercurial rename support: Pure file renames with *no actual changes* to the file fails with Diff did not apply cleanly http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2184 This bug applies to more than just Mercurial changesets.