hi Chris,
Now I have got the RB installed, and web server is up.
Meet strange issue in set up Performce repositories, in
Admin->Database->Add repository page, I have input as below:
"Name" as my specific name,
"Hosting service" as "None Custom Repository",
"Repository type" as "Perforce",
"Path"
Hi Gavin,
Thanks for the detailed info.
The fact that the LDAP setup isn't working shouldn't prevent Review Board from
showing you the option in the list, so that's unlikely to be it.
Try this on the server and see what happens:
$ python
>>> import pkg_resources
>>> list(pkg_resour
Hi Jeff,
Do you use ticket-based auth for your Perforce server, or just standard
username/password auth?
Christian
--
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com
On Jan 16, 2013, at 12:16 AM, xiuruli...@163.com wrote:
hi Chris,
Thanks for the responsitive and effective support! Our P4 server is based
on ticket auth, I have changed to use the ticket string as passwd, now can
move on. Thanks again!
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:16:38 PM UTC+8, xiuru...@163.com wrote:
>
> hi Chris,
> Now I have got the RB ins
Awesome, that was a huge help!
So the first time I ran the snippit below it gave me this:
>>> import pkg_resources
>>> list(pkg_resources.iter_entry_points('reviewboard.auth_backends'))
[]
To cut a long story short, we custom build packages for a lot of things and
unpack them to /path/to/package
On 01/16/2013 02:53 AM, Gav Main wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> I appreciate you replying so quickly. We have the RH supplied version
> installed (python-ldap-2.3.10-1.el6.x86_64).
>
> To give you a bit more information. We are looking to move from
> ReviewBoard 1.6.5 -> 1.6.15. I have setup a lab in
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for working on the reviewboard 1.7 packages for Fedora 18.
Do you have plans for building a reviewboard 1.7 package for the EPEL repo?
Currently EPEL contains reviewboard 1.6.15.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=9694
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/e
On Wed 16 Jan 2013 08:56:28 AM EST, p...@talk21.com wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> Thanks for working on the reviewboard 1.7 packages for Fedora 18.
>
> Do you have plans for building a reviewboard 1.7 package for the EPEL
> repo? Currently EPEL contains reviewboard 1.6.15.
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject
Thanks for answer by e-mails.
I've tried to add differing binary files of SDL TTCN suite with a friend.
And we've got a problem while checking diff in reviewboard server.
We send to review whole binary file and while reading it from DB we got it
in sets of 100 lines. Is there any easy way to cha
You'll need shell access to the server hosting your RB. I think the
workaround instructions are a bit off, so I'll give is a try with an
explanation.
The core issue is that the certificate needs to be confirmed, in my case
it's self-signed could be other reasons for needing this. If you can g
We're going to have a release tonight that fixes the SSL confirmation screen.
It would have gone out last night, but I had some local setup issues to deal
with.
Christian
--
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com
I get about 1 of these per month, but I have 2 this week and it's getting
to be a real problem. Developers paste large amounts of text into the
Testing Done field, after which going to the main page for the review
yields this:
Something broke! (Error 500)
It appears
Hi Steve,
This breaks on the review request page because the Testing Done text is
being stored in a JSON structure along with other data for the "Review
request updated" sections. These sections do not show on the diff viewer.
Repairing this would require going into the database viewer in the
adm
I have a 1.6 server staged for testing that I'm planning to roll out soon.
I'll import the latest database and see if the problem shows up there as
well.
As for
> Tell developers not to paste so much :)
I thought it was the size of the text also, but I'm beginning to think it's
not. I've be
It won't fix existing review requests. The data is truncated at write, so you
have to fix it manually, by hand. It will only prevent the problem for new
review requests.
It's certainly not the content. This is an old, very well known and tested bug.
The problem is that there's only so much room
I just read this again more carefully:
> Actually, the reason you're having this problem is that your release is
so old. If you upgrade, this shouldn't happen on newer review requests.
That sounds like even on the new server this particular review will be
broken, but new reviews should not end
Excellent - thanks Chris!
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 2:39:20 PM UTC-8, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> It won't fix existing review requests. The data is truncated at write, so
> you have to fix it manually, by hand. It will only prevent the problem for
> new review requests.
>
> It's certainly
Cheers for the pointer Stephen, I'll check it out. I welcome any solution
that makes life easier.
On 16 January 2013 20:30, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 01/16/2013 02:53 AM, Gav Main wrote:
> > Hi Christian,
> >
> > I appreciate you replying so quickly. We have the RH supplied version
> > instal
Hi everyone,
Review Board 1.7.2 is out. Lots of bug fixes and a few new features. See
the news post and release notes for more info.
http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2013/01/16/review-board-1-7-2-released/
We'll have a new RBTools out pretty soon with some nice improvements as
well.
Christian
-
19 matches
Mail list logo
