Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 00:24 -0800, Christian Hammond wrote: > Hey, > > So I looked into this, and we bumped our requirement to Django 1.3.x > back in the 1.6 betas. So 1.6.0 and every release since has had a >= > 1.3 (and later 1.3.1 due to security fixes) dependency. > > It was the RB 1.5 releases that supported Django 1.2. > > In general, every major release of Review Board will require the next > major version of Django. 1.7 will require Django 1.4. Thanks, I guess I'd been misremembering. Right now it looks like RB is stuck on 1.5.x on RHEL 6 unless I can convince the Django maintainer to rev to 1.3. -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
Yep - All works for me now (now running 1.6.4.1). Many thanks for the quick work. Dan On Feb 28, 9:07 am, Christian Hammond wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Christian Hammond wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:47 AM, adam.coll...@gmail.com < > > adam.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On 27 February 2012 10:53, Christian Hammond wrote: > > >>> Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. > >>> There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes and > >>> news posts. > > >>> RBTools: > >>>http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ > > >> RBTools doesn't seem to have been updated on PyPI - > >>http://pypi.python.org/pypi/RBTools. Is this deliberate? A lag in the > >> system? Or perhaps just an oversight? > > >> I installed it by referencing the tarball directly from my pip install, > >> but that's just a workaround :) > > >> Thanks, > > >> Adam > > > Hey Adam, > > > Thanks for letting me know. I'll look into it and post a reply soon. > > > Christian > > And fixed! > > Christian > > -- > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Christian Hammond wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:47 AM, adam.coll...@gmail.com < > adam.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 27 February 2012 10:53, Christian Hammond wrote: >> >>> Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. >>> There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes and >>> news posts. >>> >>> RBTools: >>> http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ >>> >> >> >> RBTools doesn't seem to have been updated on PyPI - >> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/RBTools. Is this deliberate? A lag in the >> system? Or perhaps just an oversight? >> >> I installed it by referencing the tarball directly from my pip install, >> but that's just a workaround :) >> >> Thanks, >> >> Adam > > > > Hey Adam, > > Thanks for letting me know. I'll look into it and post a reply soon. > > > Christian > And fixed! Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:47 AM, adam.coll...@gmail.com < adam.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 February 2012 10:53, Christian Hammond wrote: > >> Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. >> There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes and >> news posts. >> >> RBTools: http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ >> > > > RBTools doesn't seem to have been updated on PyPI - > http://pypi.python.org/pypi/RBTools. Is this deliberate? A lag in the > system? Or perhaps just an oversight? > > I installed it by referencing the tarball directly from my pip install, > but that's just a workaround :) > > Thanks, > > Adam Hey Adam, Thanks for letting me know. I'll look into it and post a reply soon. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
On 27 February 2012 10:53, Christian Hammond wrote: > Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. > There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes and > news posts. > > RBTools: http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ > RBTools doesn't seem to have been updated on PyPI - http://pypi.python.org/pypi/RBTools. Is this deliberate? A lag in the system? Or perhaps just an oversight? I installed it by referencing the tarball directly from my pip install, but that's just a workaround :) Thanks, Adam -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
Hey, So I looked into this, and we bumped our requirement to Django 1.3.x back in the 1.6 betas. So 1.6.0 and every release since has had a >= 1.3 (and later 1.3.1 due to security fixes) dependency. It was the RB 1.5 releases that supported Django 1.2. In general, every major release of Review Board will require the next major version of Django. 1.7 will require Django 1.4. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Stephen Gallagher < step...@gallagherhome.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 11:05 -0800, Christian Hammond wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > > > It's possible it runs with 1.2.x, but there is absolutely no testing > > of this on our end anymore. 1.3 is compatible with 1.2.x, but I > > understand you have certain guidelines to work with. > > > > This is a difficult issue, but we basically can't stand still on our > > end. It was a mistake for us not to just require 1.3 in 1.6.0, but > > from here on out, that may just need to be our requirement. Another > > issue is that we have dependencies that themselves require Django, and > > we may end up being forced into some versions of Django before long. > > > > We've talked internally about ways to speed up our releases, and > > likely in 1.7.x we'll end up staying on that release for some time, > > with new features coming in, until the massive amount of work that 2.0 > > will need is done. That will also mean the occasional dependency bump, > > which may include Django versions. Perhaps we'd move to something > > closer to Chrome, with more frequent releases without major version > > bumps. > > > > I'd say on your end, for now, do some testing to see if it works with > > 1.2.x, and then perhaps patch your copy that you ship. If it works, > > maybe we can roll back our version, but I'm certain this will come up > > again. If the Django version can't be updated for RHEL/CentOS users, > > it may be possible that we'll just have to cut off certain point > > releases for RHEL/CentOS releases, and give more advanced users who > > know they want to upgrade access to some repo that contains the > > version with a newer Django, or just let them upgrade by themselves > > the old-fashioned way. > > Yeah, I'll try to do a bit of testing. Part of the problem is that I > don't maintain the Django packages in EPEL, just the ReviewBoard > packages. How certain are we that Django 1.3 is fully ABI compatible > with 1.2? I seem to recall hitting an issue in 1.5.7 where we had > trouble with MySQL and the upgrade script because some ABI had changed > between 1.1 and 1.2. I'd prefer to avoid such hassles where possible. > > > -- > 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/ > -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en > -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 11:05 -0800, Christian Hammond wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > It's possible it runs with 1.2.x, but there is absolutely no testing > of this on our end anymore. 1.3 is compatible with 1.2.x, but I > understand you have certain guidelines to work with. > > This is a difficult issue, but we basically can't stand still on our > end. It was a mistake for us not to just require 1.3 in 1.6.0, but > from here on out, that may just need to be our requirement. Another > issue is that we have dependencies that themselves require Django, and > we may end up being forced into some versions of Django before long. > > We've talked internally about ways to speed up our releases, and > likely in 1.7.x we'll end up staying on that release for some time, > with new features coming in, until the massive amount of work that 2.0 > will need is done. That will also mean the occasional dependency bump, > which may include Django versions. Perhaps we'd move to something > closer to Chrome, with more frequent releases without major version > bumps. > > I'd say on your end, for now, do some testing to see if it works with > 1.2.x, and then perhaps patch your copy that you ship. If it works, > maybe we can roll back our version, but I'm certain this will come up > again. If the Django version can't be updated for RHEL/CentOS users, > it may be possible that we'll just have to cut off certain point > releases for RHEL/CentOS releases, and give more advanced users who > know they want to upgrade access to some repo that contains the > version with a newer Django, or just let them upgrade by themselves > the old-fashioned way. Yeah, I'll try to do a bit of testing. Part of the problem is that I don't maintain the Django packages in EPEL, just the ReviewBoard packages. How certain are we that Django 1.3 is fully ABI compatible with 1.2? I seem to recall hitting an issue in 1.5.7 where we had trouble with MySQL and the upgrade script because some ABI had changed between 1.1 and 1.2. I'd prefer to avoid such hassles where possible. -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
So the problem is that something broke with sorting the Review ID field. You can temporarily work around this by accessing the dashboard with /dashboard/?sort=. Just don't click the Review ID field. We'll get an update out that fixes this. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:34 AM, daniel.j.la...@googlemail.com < daniel.j.la...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I just tried to upgrade and i got the 500 something broke error. > > I got sent an email trace of the problem - have I done something > wrong? > > Traceback (most recent call last): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/core/handlers/base.py", line 111, in get_response >response = callback(request, *callback_args, **callback_kwargs) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/auth/util.py", line 46, in _checklogin >return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6.4- > py2.6.egg/reviewboard/accounts/decorators.py", line 41, in > _check_valid_prefs >return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6.4- > py2.6.egg/reviewboard/reviews/views.py", line 587, in dashboard >return grid.render_to_response(template_name) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 710, in render_to_response >self.load_state() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 545, in load_state >self.precompute_objects() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 612, in precompute_objects >'pk', flat=True)) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/query.py", line 84, in __len__ >self._result_cache.extend(self._iter) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/query.py", line 956, in iterator >for row in self.query.get_compiler(self.db).results_iter(): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 680, in results_iter >for rows in self.execute_sql(MULTI): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 725, in execute_sql >sql, params = self.as_sql() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 60, in as_sql >ordering, ordering_group_by = self.get_ordering() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 349, in get_ordering >self.query.model._meta, default_order=asc): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 378, in find_ordering_name >opts, alias, False) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/query.py", line 1260, in setup_joins >"Choices are: %s" % (name, ", ".join(names))) > > FieldError: Cannot resolve keyword 'get_display_id' into field. > Choices are: branch, bugs_closed, changedescs, changenum, description, > diffset_history, draft, email_message_id, file_attachments, id, > inactive_file_attachments, inactive_screenshots, > last_review_timestamp, last_updated, local_id, local_site, public, > repository, reviews, screenshots, shipit_count, starred_by, status, > submitter, summary, target_groups, target_people, testing_done, > time_added, time_emailed, visits > > Cheers > Dan > > On Feb 27, 8:53 am, Christian Hammond wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > > > Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. > > There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes > and > > news posts. > > > > RBTools:http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ > > Review Board: > http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/27/review-board-164-released/ > > > > We're trying to get things in shape for a Review Board 1.7 beta. Still > > waiting on some third-party modules for better Django 1.4 beta > > compatibility and some internal fixes and testing, but we'll hopefully be > > there soon. > > > > And as always, if you're a happy user of Review Board, we'd love to put > > your company on our Happy Users page athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/ > . > > > > Christian > > > > -- > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com > > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com > > -- > 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: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
Hi Stephen, It's possible it runs with 1.2.x, but there is absolutely no testing of this on our end anymore. 1.3 is compatible with 1.2.x, but I understand you have certain guidelines to work with. This is a difficult issue, but we basically can't stand still on our end. It was a mistake for us not to just require 1.3 in 1.6.0, but from here on out, that may just need to be our requirement. Another issue is that we have dependencies that themselves require Django, and we may end up being forced into some versions of Django before long. We've talked internally about ways to speed up our releases, and likely in 1.7.x we'll end up staying on that release for some time, with new features coming in, until the massive amount of work that 2.0 will need is done. That will also mean the occasional dependency bump, which may include Django versions. Perhaps we'd move to something closer to Chrome, with more frequent releases without major version bumps. I'd say on your end, for now, do some testing to see if it works with 1.2.x, and then perhaps patch your copy that you ship. If it works, maybe we can roll back our version, but I'm certain this will come up again. If the Django version can't be updated for RHEL/CentOS users, it may be possible that we'll just have to cut off certain point releases for RHEL/CentOS releases, and give more advanced users who know they want to upgrade access to some repo that contains the version with a newer Django, or just let them upgrade by themselves the old-fashioned way. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher < step...@gallagherhome.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 00:53 -0800, Christian Hammond wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > > > Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools > > 0.4.0. There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the > > release notes and news posts. > > The requires.txt for ReviewBoard 1.6.4 claims that it now requires > Django 1.3.1 or higher in order to run. Is this a true requirement, or > will it still run against Django 1.2.6? (If it's not possible to run > against 1.2.6, that's going to cause some serious issues with > RHEL/CentOS 6 deployments) > > -- > 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/ > -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en > -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
Can you tell me which dashboard columns you use? Christian On Feb 27, 2012, at 3:34, "daniel.j.la...@googlemail.com" wrote: > I just tried to upgrade and i got the 500 something broke error. > > I got sent an email trace of the problem - have I done something > wrong? > > Traceback (most recent call last): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/core/handlers/base.py", line 111, in get_response >response = callback(request, *callback_args, **callback_kwargs) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/auth/util.py", line 46, in _checklogin >return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6.4- > py2.6.egg/reviewboard/accounts/decorators.py", line 41, in > _check_valid_prefs >return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6.4- > py2.6.egg/reviewboard/reviews/views.py", line 587, in dashboard >return grid.render_to_response(template_name) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 710, in render_to_response >self.load_state() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 545, in load_state >self.precompute_objects() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- > py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 612, in precompute_objects >'pk', flat=True)) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/query.py", line 84, in __len__ >self._result_cache.extend(self._iter) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/query.py", line 956, in iterator >for row in self.query.get_compiler(self.db).results_iter(): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 680, in results_iter >for rows in self.execute_sql(MULTI): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 725, in execute_sql >sql, params = self.as_sql() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 60, in as_sql >ordering, ordering_group_by = self.get_ordering() > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 349, in get_ordering >self.query.model._meta, default_order=asc): > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 378, in find_ordering_name >opts, alias, False) > > File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ > django/db/models/sql/query.py", line 1260, in setup_joins >"Choices are: %s" % (name, ", ".join(names))) > > FieldError: Cannot resolve keyword 'get_display_id' into field. > Choices are: branch, bugs_closed, changedescs, changenum, description, > diffset_history, draft, email_message_id, file_attachments, id, > inactive_file_attachments, inactive_screenshots, > last_review_timestamp, last_updated, local_id, local_site, public, > repository, reviews, screenshots, shipit_count, starred_by, status, > submitter, summary, target_groups, target_people, testing_done, > time_added, time_emailed, visits > > Cheers > Dan > > On Feb 27, 8:53 am, Christian Hammond wrote: >> Hey everyone, >> >> Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. >> There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes and >> news posts. >> >> RBTools:http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ >> Review >> Board:http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/27/review-board-164-released/ >> >> We're trying to get things in shape for a Review Board 1.7 beta. Still >> waiting on some third-party modules for better Django 1.4 beta >> compatibility and some internal fixes and testing, but we'll hopefully be >> there soon. >> >> And as always, if you're a happy user of Review Board, we'd love to put >> your company on our Happy Users page athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/. >> >> Christian >> >> -- >> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com >> Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org >> VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com > > -- > 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/ > -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 00:53 -0800, Christian Hammond wrote: > Hey everyone, > > Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools > 0.4.0. There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the > release notes and news posts. The requires.txt for ReviewBoard 1.6.4 claims that it now requires Django 1.3.1 or higher in order to run. Is this a true requirement, or will it still run against Django 1.2.6? (If it's not possible to run against 1.2.6, that's going to cause some serious issues with RHEL/CentOS 6 deployments) -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0 released
I just tried to upgrade and i got the 500 something broke error. I got sent an email trace of the problem - have I done something wrong? Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/core/handlers/base.py", line 111, in get_response response = callback(request, *callback_args, **callback_kwargs) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- py2.6.egg/djblets/auth/util.py", line 46, in _checklogin return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6.4- py2.6.egg/reviewboard/accounts/decorators.py", line 41, in _check_valid_prefs return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6.4- py2.6.egg/reviewboard/reviews/views.py", line 587, in dashboard return grid.render_to_response(template_name) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 710, in render_to_response self.load_state() File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 545, in load_state self.precompute_objects() File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Djblets-0.6.16- py2.6.egg/djblets/datagrid/grids.py", line 612, in precompute_objects 'pk', flat=True)) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/query.py", line 84, in __len__ self._result_cache.extend(self._iter) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/query.py", line 956, in iterator for row in self.query.get_compiler(self.db).results_iter(): File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 680, in results_iter for rows in self.execute_sql(MULTI): File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 725, in execute_sql sql, params = self.as_sql() File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 60, in as_sql ordering, ordering_group_by = self.get_ordering() File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 349, in get_ordering self.query.model._meta, default_order=asc): File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/sql/compiler.py", line 378, in find_ordering_name opts, alias, False) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/Django-1.3.1-py2.6.egg/ django/db/models/sql/query.py", line 1260, in setup_joins "Choices are: %s" % (name, ", ".join(names))) FieldError: Cannot resolve keyword 'get_display_id' into field. Choices are: branch, bugs_closed, changedescs, changenum, description, diffset_history, draft, email_message_id, file_attachments, id, inactive_file_attachments, inactive_screenshots, last_review_timestamp, last_updated, local_id, local_site, public, repository, reviews, screenshots, shipit_count, starred_by, status, submitter, summary, target_groups, target_people, testing_done, time_added, time_emailed, visits Cheers Dan On Feb 27, 8:53 am, Christian Hammond wrote: > Hey everyone, > > Tonight we pushed out releases for Review Board 1.6.4 and RBTools 0.4.0. > There's a lot in each release, so it's worth reading the release notes and > news posts. > > RBTools:http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/26/rbtools-040-released/ > Review > Board:http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2012/02/27/review-board-164-released/ > > We're trying to get things in shape for a Review Board 1.7 beta. Still > waiting on some third-party modules for better Django 1.4 beta > compatibility and some internal fixes and testing, but we'll hopefully be > there soon. > > And as always, if you're a happy user of Review Board, we'd love to put > your company on our Happy Users page athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/. > > Christian > > -- > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com -- 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/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
