Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-17 Thread Cian Mc Govern
On 16 December 2015 at 20:02, Christian Hammond 
wrote:

> That certainly shouldn't be necessary. Sounds like maybe there was a bad
> package?
>
> If it ever happens again, please let me know. I want to be sure we figure
> out what's causing that.
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond - christ...@beanbaginc.com
> Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
> Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com
>
>
Honestly I can't remember exactly what caused but I do know it resolved an
issue I encountered.

I won't run it anymore so, thanks for letting me know.

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-16 Thread Christian Hammond
That certainly shouldn't be necessary. Sounds like maybe there was a bad
package?

If it ever happens again, please let me know. I want to be sure we figure
out what's causing that.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - christ...@beanbaginc.com
Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Cian Mc Govern 
wrote:

> On 15 December 2015 at 19:15, Christian Hammond 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> collectstatic isn't meant to be run by end users. It's intended only for
>> the packaging steps, and running it manually can cause problems. I want to
>> better understand the need to run this command, though. Can you go into
>> this a bit more?
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> --
>> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
>> Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
>> Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com
>>
>
> It fixed some upgrade issues I encountered with previous versions so I run
> it as part of my upgrade process for every version. I'll stop doing it if
> it can cause issues though.
>
>
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Cian Mc Govern 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4 December 2015 at 16:18, Stephen Gallagher <
>>> step...@gallagherhome.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably
 aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL
 project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).

>>>
>>> Thanks for your work on this Stephen. No complaints from me, both a
>>> clean install and an upgrade worked without issue.
>>>
>>> One thing I noticed was that the ReviewBoard package doesn't require
>>> uglify-js which is required when running 'rb-site manage /path/to/site
>>> collectstatic'. It might be worth adding that in a future release, I
>>> believe it's only a build dependency at the moment.
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 "reviewboard" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>> "reviewboard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> --
> 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
> "reviewboard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-16 Thread Cian Mc Govern
On 15 December 2015 at 19:15, Christian Hammond  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> collectstatic isn't meant to be run by end users. It's intended only for
> the packaging steps, and running it manually can cause problems. I want to
> better understand the need to run this command, though. Can you go into
> this a bit more?
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
> Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com
>

It fixed some upgrade issues I encountered with previous versions so I run
it as part of my upgrade process for every version. I'll stop doing it if
it can cause issues though.


> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Cian Mc Govern 
> wrote:
>
>> On 4 December 2015 at 16:18, Stephen Gallagher > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably
>>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL
>>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for your work on this Stephen. No complaints from me, both a clean
>> install and an upgrade worked without issue.
>>
>> One thing I noticed was that the ReviewBoard package doesn't require
>> uglify-js which is required when running 'rb-site manage /path/to/site
>> collectstatic'. It might be worth adding that in a future release, I
>> believe it's only a build dependency at the moment.
>>
>> --
>> 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
>> "reviewboard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> --
> 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
> "reviewboard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-16 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 10:18 AM Ken Erickson  wrote:

> Done
>
> On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 4:19:50 AM UTC-7, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> Ken, Cian and Sean: since you have had positive experiences, would you
>> mind signing into Bodhi (instructions in the original message for this
>> thread) and providing positive karma? If all three of you did so, this can
>> go to the stable repo immediately. Otherwise, I have to wait until Friday
>> to push it without karma.
>
>

Thanks, folks! The Bodhi update now has sufficient karma and is being
pushed to the stable repositories. It should be available to all users
within 24 hours (as the mirrors sync).

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-15 Thread Christian Hammond
Hi,

collectstatic isn't meant to be run by end users. It's intended only for
the packaging steps, and running it manually can cause problems. I want to
better understand the need to run this command, though. Can you go into
this a bit more?

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - https://www.reviewboard.org
Beanbag, Inc. - https://www.beanbaginc.com

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Cian Mc Govern 
wrote:

> On 4 December 2015 at 16:18, Stephen Gallagher 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably
>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL
>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>
>
> Thanks for your work on this Stephen. No complaints from me, both a clean
> install and an upgrade worked without issue.
>
> One thing I noticed was that the ReviewBoard package doesn't require
> uglify-js which is required when running 'rb-site manage /path/to/site
> collectstatic'. It might be worth adding that in a future release, I
> believe it's only a build dependency at the moment.
>
> --
> 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
> "reviewboard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-15 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Ken, Cian and Sean: since you have had positive experiences, would you mind
signing into Bodhi (instructions in the original message for this thread)
and providing positive karma? If all three of you did so, this can go to
the stable repo immediately. Otherwise, I have to wait until Friday to push
it without karma.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 6:17 AM Stephen Gallagher 
wrote:

> I left that out intentionally, though I may add it as a Suggests:
> dependency (which is not installed by default but may be offered as a
> suggestion by the package manager). It isn't required for normal operation
> and it pulls in a lot of dependencies itself. In order to keep the install
> size small, I skipped it.
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 4:09 AM Cian Mc Govern 
> wrote:
>
>> On 4 December 2015 at 16:18, Stephen Gallagher > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably
>>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL
>>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for your work on this Stephen. No complaints from me, both a clean
>> install and an upgrade worked without issue.
>>
>> One thing I noticed was that the ReviewBoard package doesn't require
>> uglify-js which is required when running 'rb-site manage /path/to/site
>> collectstatic'. It might be worth adding that in a future release, I
>> believe it's only a build dependency at the moment.
>>
>> --
>> 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
>> "reviewboard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-15 Thread Ken Erickson
Done

On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 4:19:50 AM UTC-7, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Ken, Cian and Sean: since you have had positive experiences, would you 
> mind signing into Bodhi (instructions in the original message for this 
> thread) and providing positive karma? If all three of you did so, this can 
> go to the stable repo immediately. Otherwise, I have to wait until Friday 
> to push it without karma.
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 6:17 AM Stephen Gallagher <
> ste...@gallagherhome.com > wrote:
>
>> I left that out intentionally, though I may add it as a Suggests: 
>> dependency (which is not installed by default but may be offered as a 
>> suggestion by the package manager). It isn't required for normal operation 
>> and it pulls in a lot of dependencies itself. In order to keep the install 
>> size small, I skipped it.
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 4:09 AM Cian Mc Govern > > wrote:
>>
>>> On 4 December 2015 at 16:18, Stephen Gallagher >> > wrote:
>>>
 Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
 aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
 project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).

>>>  
>>> Thanks for your work on this Stephen. No complaints from me, both a 
>>> clean install and an upgrade worked without issue.
>>>
>>> One thing I noticed was that the ReviewBoard package doesn't require 
>>> uglify-js which is required when running 'rb-site manage /path/to/site 
>>> collectstatic'. It might be worth adding that in a future release, I 
>>> believe it's only a build dependency at the moment.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 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 "reviewboard" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com .
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-10 Thread Ken Erickson
I just found it already posted under another 
thread https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/reviewboard/uXxkNePzSTs


On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 3:00:57 PM UTC-7, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:22 PM Ken Erickson  > wrote:
>
>> I just installed 2.5.2 on CentOS 7 for testing, other than comments below 
>> I haven't found anything.  
>> I do have a question, I installed the Comment Categorization extension 
>> and added 4 types to it but when I try to use it the list is empty on 
>> review comments?  It acted the same under 2.0 as well. 
>>
>>
> Could you raise that in a separate thread? I suspect we'll need to hear 
> from the upstream developers, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were only 
> skimming this thread since it's about a downstream package.
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-10 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:22 PM Ken Erickson  wrote:

> I just installed 2.5.2 on CentOS 7 for testing, other than comments below
> I haven't found anything.
> I do have a question, I installed the Comment Categorization extension and
> added 4 types to it but when I try to use it the list is empty on review
> comments?  It acted the same under 2.0 as well.
>
>
Could you raise that in a separate thread? I suspect we'll need to hear
from the upstream developers, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were only
skimming this thread since it's about a downstream package.

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-10 Thread Ken Erickson
I just installed 2.5.2 on CentOS 7 for testing, other than comments below I 
haven't found anything.  
I do have a question, I installed the Comment Categorization extension and 
added 4 types to it but when I try to use it the list is empty on review 
comments?  It acted the same under 2.0 as well. 


On Friday, December 4, 2015 at 5:05:06 PM UTC-7, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>
> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
> entails.
>
> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really 
> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this 
> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
> feedback from people testing it).
>
> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
> and then running:
> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
> than 24).
>
> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>
> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
> next stable update, please help me out here.
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-10 Thread sean
As it turns out the webpage reporting an older version was a non restarted 
fastcgi instance and unrelated to the webapi evolution.

On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 5:17:51 PM UTC+1, se...@m2mobi.com wrote:
>
> Hello Stephen,
>
> I've been patiently waiting for this for weeks now. Glad to see it's 
> getting close.
>
> Some issues I found upgrading from EPEL 2.0.18:
>
> The RPM requires: python-django-evolution >= 0.7.1
>
> ReviewBoard requires: django-evolution>=0.7.6,<=0.7.999
>
>
> *and during the rb-site upgrade I get the following message:*
>
> --  --
>
> Creating tables ...
>
> Creating table accounts_trophy
>
> Creating table attachments_fileattachmenthistory
>
> Creating table diffviewer_rawfilediffdata
>
> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget_repositories
>
> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget
>
> Creating table webapi_webapitoken
>
> Upgrading Review Board from 2.0.18 to 2.5.2
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for accounts.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for attachments.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for notifications.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for reviews.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>
> Adding baseline version for new models
>
> Evolutions in notifications baseline: webhooktarget_extra_state, 
> webhooktarget_extra_data_null
>
> Project signature has changed - an evolution is required
>
> Installing custom SQL ...
>
> Installing indexes ...
>
> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>
> Evolution successful.
>
> ---  ---
>
>
> *the next run reduces this to:*
>
>
> --  --
>
> Creating tables ...
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>
> Installing custom SQL ...
>
> Installing indexes ...
>
> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>
> No evolution required.
>
> ---  ---
>
>
> However many times I run the upgrade though, the 'unapplied evolutions for 
> webapi' persist and the webpage keeps reporting 2.0.18 as the version.
>
>
> System: CentOS 7
>
> Webserver: Nginx
>
> On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 1:05:06 AM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>
>> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
>> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
>> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
>> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
>> entails.
>>
>> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really 
>> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this 
>> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
>> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
>> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
>> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
>> feedback from people testing it).
>>
>> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
>> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
>> and then running:
>> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
>> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
>> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
>> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
>> than 24).
>>
>> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
>> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
>> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
>> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>>
>> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
>> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
>> next stable update, please help me out here.
>>
>>
>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>>
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-08 Thread sean
(Didn't have coffee yet.) It resolves the dependency issue but not the 
rb-site upgrade issue.
The log was done after installing django evolution from epel-testing 
(otherwise it broke on version dependency before ever attempting to run the 
upgrade)

On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 10:00:18 AM UTC+1, se...@m2mobi.com wrote:
>
> Should've mentioned running exactly that got me past this error already. 
>
> On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, I thought I fixed that version. I'll push an update immediately. If 
>> you manually run `yum update python-django-evolution 
>> --enablerepo=epel-testing` and then attempt the upgrade, does that resolve 
>> your upgrade issue? What version of django-evolution do you have right now? 
>> 0.7.5?
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:17 AM  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Stephen,
>>>
>>> I've been patiently waiting for this for weeks now. Glad to see it's 
>>> getting close.
>>>
>>> Some issues I found upgrading from EPEL 2.0.18:
>>>
>>> The RPM requires: python-django-evolution >= 0.7.1
>>>
>>> ReviewBoard requires: django-evolution>=0.7.6,<=0.7.999
>>>
>>>
>>> *and during the rb-site upgrade I get the following message:*
>>>
>>> --  --
>>>
>>> Creating tables ...
>>>
>>> Creating table accounts_trophy
>>>
>>> Creating table attachments_fileattachmenthistory
>>>
>>> Creating table diffviewer_rawfilediffdata
>>>
>>> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget_repositories
>>>
>>> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget
>>>
>>> Creating table webapi_webapitoken
>>>
>>> Upgrading Review Board from 2.0.18 to 2.5.2
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for accounts.
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for attachments.
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer.
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for notifications.
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for reviews.
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>>>
>>> Adding baseline version for new models
>>>
>>> Evolutions in notifications baseline: webhooktarget_extra_state, 
>>> webhooktarget_extra_data_null
>>>
>>> Project signature has changed - an evolution is required
>>>
>>> Installing custom SQL ...
>>>
>>> Installing indexes ...
>>>
>>> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>>>
>>> Evolution successful.
>>>
>>> ---  ---
>>>
>>>
>>> *the next run reduces this to:*
>>>
>>>
>>> --  --
>>>
>>> Creating tables ...
>>>
>>> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>>>
>>> Installing custom SQL ...
>>>
>>> Installing indexes ...
>>>
>>> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>>>
>>> No evolution required.
>>>
>>> ---  ---
>>>
>>>
>>> However many times I run the upgrade though, the 'unapplied evolutions 
>>> for webapi' persist and the webpage keeps reporting 2.0.18 as the version.
>>>
>>>
>>> System: CentOS 7
>>>
>>> Webserver: Nginx
>>>
>>> On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 1:05:06 AM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher 
>>> wrote:

 Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
 aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
 project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).

 For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
 software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
 packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
 EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
 entails.

 This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd 
 really like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I 
 push 
 this out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
 problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
 releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
 the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
 feedback from people testing it).

 So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
 new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
 and then running:
 `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
 --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
 installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, 
 so 
 it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
 than 24).

 Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you 
 can create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have 
 feedback to provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora 
 Account at  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in 
 at 

Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-08 Thread sean
Should've mentioned running exactly that got me past this error already. 

On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Hmm, I thought I fixed that version. I'll push an update immediately. If 
> you manually run `yum update python-django-evolution 
> --enablerepo=epel-testing` and then attempt the upgrade, does that resolve 
> your upgrade issue? What version of django-evolution do you have right now? 
> 0.7.5?
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:17 AM  wrote:
>
>> Hello Stephen,
>>
>> I've been patiently waiting for this for weeks now. Glad to see it's 
>> getting close.
>>
>> Some issues I found upgrading from EPEL 2.0.18:
>>
>> The RPM requires: python-django-evolution >= 0.7.1
>>
>> ReviewBoard requires: django-evolution>=0.7.6,<=0.7.999
>>
>>
>> *and during the rb-site upgrade I get the following message:*
>>
>> --  --
>>
>> Creating tables ...
>>
>> Creating table accounts_trophy
>>
>> Creating table attachments_fileattachmenthistory
>>
>> Creating table diffviewer_rawfilediffdata
>>
>> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget_repositories
>>
>> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget
>>
>> Creating table webapi_webapitoken
>>
>> Upgrading Review Board from 2.0.18 to 2.5.2
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for accounts.
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for attachments.
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer.
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for notifications.
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for reviews.
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>>
>> Adding baseline version for new models
>>
>> Evolutions in notifications baseline: webhooktarget_extra_state, 
>> webhooktarget_extra_data_null
>>
>> Project signature has changed - an evolution is required
>>
>> Installing custom SQL ...
>>
>> Installing indexes ...
>>
>> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>>
>> Evolution successful.
>>
>> ---  ---
>>
>>
>> *the next run reduces this to:*
>>
>>
>> --  --
>>
>> Creating tables ...
>>
>> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>>
>> Installing custom SQL ...
>>
>> Installing indexes ...
>>
>> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>>
>> No evolution required.
>>
>> ---  ---
>>
>>
>> However many times I run the upgrade though, the 'unapplied evolutions 
>> for webapi' persist and the webpage keeps reporting 2.0.18 as the version.
>>
>>
>> System: CentOS 7
>>
>> Webserver: Nginx
>>
>> On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 1:05:06 AM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
>>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
>>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>>
>>> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
>>> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
>>> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
>>> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
>>> entails.
>>>
>>> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd 
>>> really like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push 
>>> this out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
>>> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
>>> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
>>> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
>>> feedback from people testing it).
>>>
>>> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
>>> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
>>> and then running:
>>> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
>>> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
>>> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
>>> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
>>> than 24).
>>>
>>> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
>>> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
>>> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
>>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
>>> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>>>
>>> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
>>> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
>>> next stable update, please help me out here.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>>>
>> -- 
>> Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: 
>> https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
>> Want us to 

Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:21 AM Stephen Gallagher 
wrote:

> Hmm, I thought I fixed that version. I'll push an update immediately. If
> you manually run `yum update python-django-evolution
> --enablerepo=epel-testing` and then attempt the upgrade, does that resolve
> your upgrade issue? What version of django-evolution do you have right now?
> 0.7.5?
>
>>
>>

Hmm, looks like it should have at least been requiring 0.7.5, not 0.7.1.
Was that a typo or were you looking at the 2.0.18 requirement?

Anyway, I'm building an updated version that explicitly requires
django-evolution 0.7.6.

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 10:29 AM Paul Fee  wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
>
> That's great news, I had been wondering if Fedora/RHEL users would be
> seeing RB2.5 soon.
>
> On Fedora, it looks like the Django packages have moved ahead to 1.8, but
> RB still needs 1.6.  Hence ReviewBoard has disappeared from Fedora from F22
> onwards :(
>
>
Yeah, I've dropped it from the official repositories. I *had* been
maintaining it as a separate COPR repository that contains an old version
of Django, but honestly no one seems to actually be using it.
Realistically, I think people just prefer to deploy something important
like Review Board atop RHEL or CentOS rather than Fedora, and since
packaging it on Fedora is basically impossible at this time (not including
deployment via Docker or similar), it just isn't worth the effort to
maintain there.



> Nice to see that the situation on RHEL+EPEL is better.  For users on that
> platform, what can we expect when installing the upgrade?  If I already
> have a 2.0.18 installation and a site populated with users/reviews/comments
> etc. will this migrate without effort up to RB 2.5.2 or is anything else
> required, e.g. database backup/restore?
>
>
The expected behavior is that all existing reviews, users, repositories and
everything else should remain after the upgrade. That being said, if you
are upgrading to a new major release and do NOT do a full backup to be on
the safe side, you have made a grave error in judgement.

Also, as I said in the initial email: this is currently in the testing
repository precisely to catch any such issues before it goes to stable and
everyone running Review Board picks it up on their next yum update. So if
there are bugs preventing the trivial upgrade, let's get them identified
and fixed before I push this to the stable repo.

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Hmm, I thought I fixed that version. I'll push an update immediately. If
you manually run `yum update python-django-evolution
--enablerepo=epel-testing` and then attempt the upgrade, does that resolve
your upgrade issue? What version of django-evolution do you have right now?
0.7.5?

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:17 AM  wrote:

> Hello Stephen,
>
> I've been patiently waiting for this for weeks now. Glad to see it's
> getting close.
>
> Some issues I found upgrading from EPEL 2.0.18:
>
> The RPM requires: python-django-evolution >= 0.7.1
>
> ReviewBoard requires: django-evolution>=0.7.6,<=0.7.999
>
>
> *and during the rb-site upgrade I get the following message:*
>
> --  --
>
> Creating tables ...
>
> Creating table accounts_trophy
>
> Creating table attachments_fileattachmenthistory
>
> Creating table diffviewer_rawfilediffdata
>
> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget_repositories
>
> Creating table notifications_webhooktarget
>
> Creating table webapi_webapitoken
>
> Upgrading Review Board from 2.0.18 to 2.5.2
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for accounts.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for attachments.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for notifications.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for reviews.
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>
> Adding baseline version for new models
>
> Evolutions in notifications baseline: webhooktarget_extra_state,
> webhooktarget_extra_data_null
>
> Project signature has changed - an evolution is required
>
> Installing custom SQL ...
>
> Installing indexes ...
>
> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>
> Evolution successful.
>
> ---  ---
>
>
> *the next run reduces this to:*
>
>
> --  --
>
> Creating tables ...
>
> There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.
>
> Installing custom SQL ...
>
> Installing indexes ...
>
> Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)
>
> No evolution required.
>
> ---  ---
>
>
> However many times I run the upgrade though, the 'unapplied evolutions for
> webapi' persist and the webpage keeps reporting 2.0.18 as the version.
>
>
> System: CentOS 7
>
> Webserver: Nginx
>
> On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 1:05:06 AM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably
>> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL
>> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>>
>> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on
>> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x
>> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading
>> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this
>> entails.
>>
>> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really
>> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this
>> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a
>> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream
>> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in
>> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive
>> feedback from people testing it).
>>
>> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the
>> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository
>> and then running:
>> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update
>> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing
>> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so
>> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less
>> than 24).
>>
>> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can
>> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to
>> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at
>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and
>> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>>
>> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to
>> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your
>> next stable update, please help me out here.
>>
>>
>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>>
> --
> 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
> "reviewboard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to 

Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-07 Thread sean
Hello Stephen,

I've been patiently waiting for this for weeks now. Glad to see it's 
getting close.

Some issues I found upgrading from EPEL 2.0.18:

The RPM requires: python-django-evolution >= 0.7.1

ReviewBoard requires: django-evolution>=0.7.6,<=0.7.999


*and during the rb-site upgrade I get the following message:*

--  --

Creating tables ...

Creating table accounts_trophy

Creating table attachments_fileattachmenthistory

Creating table diffviewer_rawfilediffdata

Creating table notifications_webhooktarget_repositories

Creating table notifications_webhooktarget

Creating table webapi_webapitoken

Upgrading Review Board from 2.0.18 to 2.5.2

There are unapplied evolutions for accounts.

There are unapplied evolutions for attachments.

There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer.

There are unapplied evolutions for notifications.

There are unapplied evolutions for reviews.

There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.

Adding baseline version for new models

Evolutions in notifications baseline: webhooktarget_extra_state, 
webhooktarget_extra_data_null

Project signature has changed - an evolution is required

Installing custom SQL ...

Installing indexes ...

Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)

Evolution successful.

---  ---


*the next run reduces this to:*


--  --

Creating tables ...

There are unapplied evolutions for webapi.

Installing custom SQL ...

Installing indexes ...

Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s)

No evolution required.

---  ---


However many times I run the upgrade though, the 'unapplied evolutions for 
webapi' persist and the webpage keeps reporting 2.0.18 as the version.


System: CentOS 7

Webserver: Nginx

On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 1:05:06 AM UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>
> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
> entails.
>
> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really 
> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this 
> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
> feedback from people testing it).
>
> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
> and then running:
> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
> than 24).
>
> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>
> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
> next stable update, please help me out here.
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-05 Thread Paul Fee
Hi Stephen,

That's great news, I had been wondering if Fedora/RHEL users would be 
seeing RB2.5 soon.

On Fedora, it looks like the Django packages have moved ahead to 1.8, but 
RB still needs 1.6.  Hence ReviewBoard has disappeared from Fedora from F22 
onwards :(

Nice to see that the situation on RHEL+EPEL is better.  For users on that 
platform, what can we expect when installing the upgrade?  If I already 
have a 2.0.18 installation and a site populated with users/reviews/comments 
etc. will this migrate without effort up to RB 2.5.2 or is anything else 
required, e.g. database backup/restore?

Thanks,
Paul

On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 12:05:06 AM UTC, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably 
> aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL 
> project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).
>
> For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on 
> software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x 
> packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading 
> EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this 
> entails.
>
> This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really 
> like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this 
> out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a 
> problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream 
> releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in 
> the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive 
> feedback from people testing it).
>
> So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the 
> new RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository 
> and then running:
> `yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update 
> --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing 
> installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so 
> it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less 
> than 24).
>
> Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can 
> create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to 
> provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at  
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and 
> use the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.
>
> Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to 
> stable at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your 
> next stable update, please help me out here.
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
>

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


[Testing Needed] Review Board 2.5.2 for RHEL/CentOS 7

2015-12-04 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Hello, folks! It's time for a big update. As many of you are probably
aware, I maintain the RPMs of Review Board that live in Fedora's EPEL
project[1] (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux).

For some time now, EPEL 7 (which provides community-supported add-on
software for RHEL 7 and CentOS 7) has been providing Review Board 2.0.x
packages. However, time passes and I now feel that it's worth upgrading
EPEL 7 to carry 2.5.2 with all of the enhancements and bugfixes that this
entails.

This is a pretty major update to the server-side of things, so I'd really
like to get some serious testing performed if possible before I push this
out to the stable repository. (Getting testing for updates has been a
problem in the past, which is why updates tend to trail the upstream
releases by at least two weeks; EPEL has a policy that it must remain in
the testing repository for at least that time unless it receives positive
feedback from people testing it).

So, how can you help? The simplest way to do so would be to install the new
RPMs on your RHEL/CentOS 7 systems by installing the EPEL 7 repository and
then running:
`yum install --enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` or `yum update
--enablerepo=epel-testing ReviewBoard` if you have an existing
installation. (Note: this was just submitted for the testing repository, so
it may take up to 48 hours to reach your local mirror, though usually less
than 24).

Then play around with it; test that it upgrades cleanly and that you can
create new sites in your preferred configuration. Once you have feedback to
provide (positive *or* negative), please create a Fedora Account at
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then log in at
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-b8671a8638 and use
the feedback buttons and comment field to let me know how it went.

Warning: if I get no feedback at all, I'm just going to push this to stable
at the end of two weeks, so if you don't want any surprises at your next
stable update, please help me out here.


[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL

-- 
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 
"reviewboard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.