Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Definitely sounds like a corrupted installation of some sort. I'd try reinstalling Review Board from scratch, deleting the original package first. If that doesn't call it... something deeper might be messed up. Christian -- Christian Hammond President/CEO of Beanbag

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Hi, >>> import reviewboard.scmtools Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in ImportError: No module named scmtools >>> print reviewboard.scmtools Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'scmtools' >>> import revi

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Sorry Rob. This fell off my radar. A couple more tests from the Python shell: >>> import reviewboard.scmtools >>> print reviewboard.scmtools >>> import reviewboard.scmtools.core >>> print reviewboard.scmtools.core >>> from reviewboard.scmtools.core import PRE_CREATION, UNKNOWN, FileNotFoundError

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Did you have any other ideas about this one? Thanks Rob On Tuesday, 31 May 2016 10:03:40 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote: > > Ahaa, that looks better... > > >>> print reviewboard.__file__ > > /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.4-py2.6.egg/reviewboard/__init__.pyc > > Thanks > Rob > > On

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Ahaa, that looks better... >>> print reviewboard.__file__ /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.4-py2.6.egg/reviewboard/__init__.pyc Thanks Rob On Tuesday, 31 May 2016 09:44:08 UTC+1, Christian Hammond wrote: > > Sorry, typo. Should have been reviewboard.__file__ > > (That's two under

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Sorry, typo. Should have been reviewboard.__file__ (That's two underscores on each side.) Christian -- Christian Hammond President/CEO of Beanbag Makers of Review Board On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Rob Backhurst wrote: > Hi Chr

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Hi Christian, Here you go... # python Python 2.6.6 (r266:84292, May 22 2015, 08:34:51) [GCC 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-15)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import reviewboard >>> print reviewboard.__file_ Traceback (most recent call last):

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Hi Rob, Can you run: $ python >>> import reviewboard >>> print reviewboard.__file_ Christian -- Christian Hammond President/CEO of Beanbag Makers of Review Board On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Rob Backhurst wrote: > Hi Christian

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Hi Christian, Sorry for the slow reply. It was installed using easy_install, then the DB restored from our live reviewboard server. There is no reviewboard dir when running the rb-site upgrade. Thanks Rob On Friday, 13 May 2016 01:09:07 UTC+1, Christian Hammond wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > How was R

Re: rb-site upgrade fails

Hi Rob, How was Review Board installed? It looks like there's some weirdness going on with the module. Can you verify that there's no "reviewboard" directory in the directory you're in when running rb-site upgrade? Christian -- Christian Hammond President/CEO of Beanbag

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Tested OK. Added +1 Karma. Thanx! понедельник, 2 мая 2016 г., 16:34:38 UTC+3 пользователь Stephen Gallagher написал: > > I've just submitted a corrected version of Review Board to the > epel-testing repository: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2bab5ad96d > > Please te

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Sorry, haven't had chance to test it today. Hope to do it later this week. вторник, 3 мая 2016 г., 1:47:25 UTC+3 пользователь Vlad S. написал: > > Thanx! I will be able to test and report on May 4. > > /v > >> >> -- Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: https://www.reviewboard.org/powe

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Thanx! I will be able to test and report on May 4. /v 2 мая 2016 г. 16:34 пользователь "Stephen Gallagher" < step...@gallagherhome.com> написал: > I've just submitted a corrected version of Review Board to the > epel-testing repository: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

I've just submitted a corrected version of Review Board to the epel-testing repository: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2bab5ad96d Please test it and provide it with positive or negative feedback (karma). That will get it into the stable release faster. (note: the reason

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

I thought I had fixed the mime parse thing already. I'll correct that when I fix up the whoosh thing tomorrow. I'm a comaintainer of Whoosh on the other branches, so I can push the updated version. I just wanted to check with the other maintainers in case there was a compatibility break I need to

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Hi Stephen, Thank you for the reply. Also there is another issue with "mimeparse>=0.1.3" requirement. Somehow it works only once changed to "python-mimeparse>=0.1.3". RHEL has proper 0.1.4 version though another package name. I tried to contact python-whoosh rpm maintainer and got email error:

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Sorry Vlad, that's my fault. I didn't notice the upgraded requirement. I'm going to try to get Whoosh updates in EPEL7 on Monday (once I talk to the maintainer of that package to figure out if they held it to the older version intentionally). On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 7:01 PM Vlad wrote: > Hi Chris

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Hi Christian, Would this hack affect only Search (Indexed search) function of ReviewBoard? Search is not configured by default, so this is not a strict dependency as I understand. Am I correct? I am not sure why RHEL7 has no whoosh update, so I did not install whoosh with pip. /v On Sun, May 1,

Re: rb-site upgrade fails with whoosh 2.5.7 on RHEL7/OL7

Hi Vlad, I can't speak for the RPMs, but Review Board itself requires Whoosh 2.6+. There are bugs in prior versions that impact Review Board, so while you may be able to change the dependencies, I can't guarantee it'll fully work as expected. Christian -- Christian Hammond President/CEO of Bean

Re: rb-site upgrade Fails (upgrading from 1.6.16 to 2.0.11

Hi Cory, My apologies for the delay. What likely happened is that you ended up with a mix of MyISAM and InnoDB tables. The new MySQL server is likely defaulting to InnoDB, whereas your dump is likely MyISAM. You'll need to fix up the dump to replace all MyISAM instances with InnoDB. You'd then n

Re: rb-site upgrade fails on database migration

Thanks, that solved the issue. Looks like mysql 5.5 defaults to InnoDB but our original tables were in the older format. I altered them to InnoDB and everything works now. Thanks, --Erik On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 4:26:12 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: > > That error has to do with having a m

Re: rb-site upgrade fails on database migration

That error has to do with having a mix of InnoDB and MyISAM tables. You need to make sure all tables are the same format. If MySQL is creating new tables with one, then you should convert the rest. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Bea

Re: rb-site upgrade fails on database migration

I'm getting the exact same error. I'm trying to test an upgrade before actually performing one on the live server and am getting the same Django stack trace. We are running RB 1.5.2 in production on Ubuntu 12.04. I've been using easy_install to install ReviewBoard and made sure to force the Dja