Re: Reviewboard showing only 20 branches of gitlab repository

[Christian Hammond]

It doesn't ring any bells. It does sound like a credential/repository
access issue, though. I suspect *something* is preventing that user from
accessing changes on that repository in GitLab's settings. I know other
companies are using private repositories on GitLab with Review Board
without issue.

What's the problem you're hitting with RBTools?

Christian

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 9:04 AM korta...@email.cz  wrote:

> Update:
>
> When we tested it with a "public" repository on our gitlab server, it
> works. But our repositories needs to be private.
>
> So it seems the problem is somewhere in the recognition of the reviewboard
> as a valid user, even though I filled in all the tokens and keys and user
> credentials...
>
> Rings any bells?
>
> Dne pondělí 18. května 2020 16:47:21 UTC+2 kort...@email.cz napsal(a):
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> Thanks for the ideas, my admin managed to update reviewboard to 3.0.17,
>> but no luck.
>> I found out I am missing the SSH settings, so I created a new one and
>> added the public part to our gitlab repository, but that was not it
>> either...
>>
>> I am running out of ideas... is there some information I can give you so
>> you can help me?
>>
>> For some reason we were not able to make the RBTools run either.
>>
>> I would hate to have to look for another tool:(
>>
>> Dne pondělí 18. května 2020 5:19:48 UTC+2 Christian Hammond napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Hi Jirka,
>>>
>>> We've fixed the pagination issue and will have the fix in 3.0.18.
>>>
>>> I don't know what's going on in that backtrace, but 3.0.12 is pretty old
>>> now, so it may have been a bug in an older release. Or some change in their
>>> API we're not aware of, or something else getting in the way of access. I
>>> unfortunately don't have enough information to go off of from the
>>> backtrace. Just that the API for fetching a change is returning a HTTP 404.
>>>
>>> I'd try upgrading and also make sure there aren't any restrictions on
>>> the user configured in Review Board to authenticate with GitLab.
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 6:30 AM kort...@email.cz 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi again,

 There is another problem... I tried to create a review request from the
 branches and commits I see and I get
 "HTTP 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERROR"

 What is wrong? Any idea? Isn't the problem, that our reviewboard is
 running on https and port number 444?

 Log for this error:
 ERROR

  - root - Unable to update new review request from commit ID 
 6a60ac36244fb185817055e6e9c404106b103260 on repository ID=2: HTTP Error 
 404: Not Found
 Traceback (most recent call last):
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\managers.py",
  line 165, in create
 draft.update_from_commit_id(commit_id)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\models\review_request_draft.py",
  line 419, in update_from_commit_id
 return self.update_from_committed_change(commit_id)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\models\review_request_draft.py",
  line 492, in update_from_committed_change
 commit = self.repository.get_change(commit_id)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\scmtools\models.py",
  line 509, in get_change
 return hosting_service.get_change(self, revision)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\gitlab.py",
  line 641, in get_change
 headers={'Accept': 'text/plain'})
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\service.py",
  line 188, in http_get
 return self.http_request(url, headers=headers, method='GET', **kwargs)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\service.py",
  line 319, in http_request
 response = urlopen(request, context=context)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
 154, in urlopen
 return opener.open(url, data, timeout)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
 435, in open
 response = meth(req, response)
   File 
 "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 

Re: utf8 colation error

[Christian Hammond]

It should work, outside of Emojis (since that's sort of the main pain point
with MySQL's "UTF-8" support).

We do have sort of fake Emojis supported in Markdown mode, like :+1: and
such, which will render to Emojis. Just the Unicode characters won't work
on MySQL with that charset.

Christian

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 5:23 AM Adam Weremczuk  wrote:

> Hi Christian,
>
> Thank you for a detailed and thorough reply.
>
> Since it's a fresh installation I've opted for mysql-server
> 5.7.30-1debian9 and utf8.
>
> Would expect any issues with it?
>
> Thanks,
> Adam
>
>
> On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 04:39, Christian Hammond 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> Yeah... Here's the situation with MySQL/MariaDB and "utf8".
>>
>> When MySQL introduced utf8 charset, they went with a sort of "compressed"
>> version of UTF-8 that excluded bits for some character ranges (I am super
>> simplifying this). Emojis and some other character ranges didn't exist at
>> the time, and now cannot be represented by their "utf8".
>>
>> utf8mb4 is the "real" UTF-8 charset type. However, it's not a drop-in
>> replacement. It affects key lengths, amongst other things, and is
>> incompatible with, well, many things.
>>
>> There *is* a way to get true UTF-8 support. It requires utf8mb4, and a
>> handful of global settings applied to the server to enable large keys and a
>> different InnoDB file format. It then requires a special command to be set
>> at the beginning of each MySQL/MariaDB session to opt into some better
>> support.
>>
>> Basically, it's invasive and not something that we can currently tell
>> people to enable, or it'll cause new problems. It also requires full table
>> rebuilds. The instructions also depend on the version of MySQL/MariaDB.
>>
>> We plan to bake in some level of support for it in Review Board in the
>> future, but Django doesn't natively support it, and it'll require a bunch
>> of special logic to rebuild data.
>>
>> I can't currently provide the settings you may need, because many of them
>> are dependent on the version of MySQL/MariaDB you're using, and I haven't
>> verified them lately (just working off internal notes). It boils down to:
>>
>> 1) Using utf8mb4 charsets for all databases, tables, and
>> connections/sessions
>> 2) Using utf8mb4_bin collation for all the above
>> 3) Enabling innodb_large_prefix and innodb_per_table (might depend on the
>> versions of MySQL/MariaDB)
>> 4) Enabling innodb_file_format=barracuda (not needed on modern versions)
>>
>> This is not an exhaustive step-by-step.
>>
>> PostgreSQL will do UTF-8 by default, fwiw.
>>
>> Hoping to revisit this support in MySQL/MariaDB after RB4 wraps up.
>> Should be easier now that MySQL/MariaDB have made progress in this area,
>> and I need to update my knowledge of what that progress looks like.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 5:31 AM Adam Weremczuk 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think utf8mb4 was a good idea and I believe it's now leading to:
>>>
>>> sudo rb-site install /var/www/mysite
>>> (...)
>>> * Installing the site...
>>> (...)
>>> Creating table scmtools_repository
>>>
>>> [!] There was an error synchronizing the database. Make sure the
>>> database is created and has the appropriate permissions, and then
>>> continue.
>>> [!] Details: (1071, 'Specified key was too long; max key length is 767
>>> bytes')
>>>
>>> Press Enter to continue
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, 14 May 2020 16:01:35 UTC+1, Adam Weremczuk wrote:

 Hi all,

 Following installation guide for MySQL I've added to /etc/mysql/my.cnf

 [client]
 default-character-set=utf8

 [mysqld]
 character-set-server=utf8

 MariaDB fails to start:

 May 14 14:01:41 gittest systemd[1]: Starting MariaDB 10.1.44 database
 server...
 May 14 14:01:41 gittest mysqld[10318]: 2020-05-14 14:01:41
 139687784537472 [Note] /usr/sbin/mysqld (mysqld 10.1.44-MariaDB-0+deb9u1)
 starting as process 10318 ...
 May 14 14:01:41 gittest mysqld[10318]: 2020-05-14 14:01:41
 139687784537472 [ERROR] COLLATION 'utf8mb4_general_ci' is not valid for
 CHARACTER SET 'utf8'
 May 14 14:01:41 gittest mysqld[10318]: 2020-05-14 14:01:41
 139687784537472 [ERROR] Aborting
 May 14 14:01:41 gittest systemd[1]: mariadb.service: Main process
 exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
 May 14 14:01:41 gittest systemd[1]: Failed to start MariaDB 10.1.44
 database server.

 When I comment out these 2 addition it starts fine and I can retrieve
 the following:

 MariaDB [(none)]> SHOW COLLATION LIKE 'utf8%';

 +--+-+-+-+--+-+
 | Collation| Charset | Id  | Default | Compiled |
 Sortlen |

 +--+-+-+-+--+-+
 | utf8_general_ci  | utf8|  33 | Yes | Yes  |
  1 |
 | utf8_bin

Re: Reviewboard showing only 20 branches of gitlab repository

[korta...@email.cz]

Update:

When we tested it with a "public" repository on our gitlab server, it 
works. But our repositories needs to be private.

So it seems the problem is somewhere in the recognition of the reviewboard 
as a valid user, even though I filled in all the tokens and keys and user 
credentials...

Rings any bells?

Dne pondělí 18. května 2020 16:47:21 UTC+2 kort...@email.cz napsal(a):
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> Thanks for the ideas, my admin managed to update reviewboard to 3.0.17, 
> but no luck.
> I found out I am missing the SSH settings, so I created a new one and 
> added the public part to our gitlab repository, but that was not it 
> either...
>
> I am running out of ideas... is there some information I can give you so 
> you can help me? 
>
> For some reason we were not able to make the RBTools run either.
>
> I would hate to have to look for another tool:(
>
> Dne pondělí 18. května 2020 5:19:48 UTC+2 Christian Hammond napsal(a):
>>
>> Hi Jirka,
>>
>> We've fixed the pagination issue and will have the fix in 3.0.18.
>>
>> I don't know what's going on in that backtrace, but 3.0.12 is pretty old 
>> now, so it may have been a bug in an older release. Or some change in their 
>> API we're not aware of, or something else getting in the way of access. I 
>> unfortunately don't have enough information to go off of from the 
>> backtrace. Just that the API for fetching a change is returning a HTTP 404.
>>
>> I'd try upgrading and also make sure there aren't any restrictions on the 
>> user configured in Review Board to authenticate with GitLab.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 6:30 AM kort...@email.cz  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi again,
>>>
>>> There is another problem... I tried to create a review request from the 
>>> branches and commits I see and I get
>>> "HTTP 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERROR"
>>>
>>> What is wrong? Any idea? Isn't the problem, that our reviewboard is 
>>> running on https and port number 444?
>>>
>>> Log for this error:
>>> ERROR 
>>>
>>>  - root - Unable to update new review request from commit ID 
>>> 6a60ac36244fb185817055e6e9c404106b103260 on repository ID=2: HTTP Error 
>>> 404: Not Found
>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\managers.py",
>>>  line 165, in create
>>> draft.update_from_commit_id(commit_id)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\models\review_request_draft.py",
>>>  line 419, in update_from_commit_id
>>> return self.update_from_committed_change(commit_id)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\models\review_request_draft.py",
>>>  line 492, in update_from_committed_change
>>> commit = self.repository.get_change(commit_id)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\scmtools\models.py",
>>>  line 509, in get_change
>>> return hosting_service.get_change(self, revision)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\gitlab.py",
>>>  line 641, in get_change
>>> headers={'Accept': 'text/plain'})
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\service.py",
>>>  line 188, in http_get
>>> return self.http_request(url, headers=headers, method='GET', **kwargs)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\service.py",
>>>  line 319, in http_request
>>> response = urlopen(request, context=context)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
>>> 154, in urlopen
>>> return opener.open(url, data, timeout)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
>>> 435, in open
>>> response = meth(req, response)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
>>> 548, in http_response
>>> 'http', request, response, code, msg, hdrs)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
>>> 467, in error
>>> result = self._call_chain(*args)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
>>> 407, in _call_chain
>>> result = func(*args)
>>>   File 
>>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", line 
>>> 654, in http_error_302
>>> return 

Re: Reviewboard showing only 20 branches of gitlab repository

[korta...@email.cz]

Hi Christian,

Thanks for the ideas, my admin managed to update reviewboard to 3.0.17, but 
no luck.
I found out I am missing the SSH settings, so I created a new one and added 
the public part to our gitlab repository, but that was not it either...

I am running out of ideas... is there some information I can give you so 
you can help me? 

For some reason we were not able to make the RBTools run either.

I would hate to have to look for another tool:(

Dne pondělí 18. května 2020 5:19:48 UTC+2 Christian Hammond napsal(a):
>
> Hi Jirka,
>
> We've fixed the pagination issue and will have the fix in 3.0.18.
>
> I don't know what's going on in that backtrace, but 3.0.12 is pretty old 
> now, so it may have been a bug in an older release. Or some change in their 
> API we're not aware of, or something else getting in the way of access. I 
> unfortunately don't have enough information to go off of from the 
> backtrace. Just that the API for fetching a change is returning a HTTP 404.
>
> I'd try upgrading and also make sure there aren't any restrictions on the 
> user configured in Review Board to authenticate with GitLab.
>
> Christian
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 6:30 AM kort...@email.cz  <
> kort...@email.cz > wrote:
>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> There is another problem... I tried to create a review request from the 
>> branches and commits I see and I get
>> "HTTP 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERROR"
>>
>> What is wrong? Any idea? Isn't the problem, that our reviewboard is 
>> running on https and port number 444?
>>
>> Log for this error:
>> ERROR 
>>
>>  - root - Unable to update new review request from commit ID 
>> 6a60ac36244fb185817055e6e9c404106b103260 on repository ID=2: HTTP Error 404: 
>> Not Found
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\managers.py",
>>  line 165, in create
>> draft.update_from_commit_id(commit_id)
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\models\review_request_draft.py",
>>  line 419, in update_from_commit_id
>> return self.update_from_committed_change(commit_id)
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\reviews\models\review_request_draft.py",
>>  line 492, in update_from_committed_change
>> commit = self.repository.get_change(commit_id)
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\scmtools\models.py",
>>  line 509, in get_change
>> return hosting_service.get_change(self, revision)
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\gitlab.py",
>>  line 641, in get_change
>> headers={'Accept': 'text/plain'})
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\service.py",
>>  line 188, in http_get
>> return self.http_request(url, headers=headers, method='GET', **kwargs)
>>   File 
>> "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\apps\reviewboardpowerpack\htdocs\Lib\site-packages\ReviewBoard-3.0.12-py2.7.egg\reviewboard\hostingsvcs\service.py",
>>  line 319, in http_request
>> response = urlopen(request, context=context)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 154, in urlopen
>> return opener.open(url, data, timeout)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 435, in open
>> response = meth(req, response)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 548, in http_response
>> 'http', request, response, code, msg, hdrs)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 467, in error
>> result = self._call_chain(*args)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 407, in _call_chain
>> result = func(*args)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 654, in http_error_302
>> return self.parent.open(new, timeout=req.timeout)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 435, in open
>> response = meth(req, response)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 548, in http_response
>> 'http', request, response, code, msg, hdrs)
>>   File "C:\App\Bitnami\reviewboardpowerpack-3.0.12-1\python\lib\urllib2.py", 
>> line 473, in error
>> return self._call_chain(*args)
>>   File 

Re: utf8 colation error

[Adam Weremczuk]

Hi Christian,

Thank you for a detailed and thorough reply.

Since it's a fresh installation I've opted for mysql-server 5.7.30-1debian9
and utf8.

Would expect any issues with it?

Thanks,
Adam


On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 04:39, Christian Hammond 
wrote:

> Hi Adam,
>
> Yeah... Here's the situation with MySQL/MariaDB and "utf8".
>
> When MySQL introduced utf8 charset, they went with a sort of "compressed"
> version of UTF-8 that excluded bits for some character ranges (I am super
> simplifying this). Emojis and some other character ranges didn't exist at
> the time, and now cannot be represented by their "utf8".
>
> utf8mb4 is the "real" UTF-8 charset type. However, it's not a drop-in
> replacement. It affects key lengths, amongst other things, and is
> incompatible with, well, many things.
>
> There *is* a way to get true UTF-8 support. It requires utf8mb4, and a
> handful of global settings applied to the server to enable large keys and a
> different InnoDB file format. It then requires a special command to be set
> at the beginning of each MySQL/MariaDB session to opt into some better
> support.
>
> Basically, it's invasive and not something that we can currently tell
> people to enable, or it'll cause new problems. It also requires full table
> rebuilds. The instructions also depend on the version of MySQL/MariaDB.
>
> We plan to bake in some level of support for it in Review Board in the
> future, but Django doesn't natively support it, and it'll require a bunch
> of special logic to rebuild data.
>
> I can't currently provide the settings you may need, because many of them
> are dependent on the version of MySQL/MariaDB you're using, and I haven't
> verified them lately (just working off internal notes). It boils down to:
>
> 1) Using utf8mb4 charsets for all databases, tables, and
> connections/sessions
> 2) Using utf8mb4_bin collation for all the above
> 3) Enabling innodb_large_prefix and innodb_per_table (might depend on the
> versions of MySQL/MariaDB)
> 4) Enabling innodb_file_format=barracuda (not needed on modern versions)
>
> This is not an exhaustive step-by-step.
>
> PostgreSQL will do UTF-8 by default, fwiw.
>
> Hoping to revisit this support in MySQL/MariaDB after RB4 wraps up. Should
> be easier now that MySQL/MariaDB have made progress in this area, and I
> need to update my knowledge of what that progress looks like.
>
> Christian
>
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 5:31 AM Adam Weremczuk 
> wrote:
>
>> I don't think utf8mb4 was a good idea and I believe it's now leading to:
>>
>> sudo rb-site install /var/www/mysite
>> (...)
>> * Installing the site...
>> (...)
>> Creating table scmtools_repository
>>
>> [!] There was an error synchronizing the database. Make sure the
>> database is created and has the appropriate permissions, and then
>> continue.
>> [!] Details: (1071, 'Specified key was too long; max key length is 767
>> bytes')
>>
>> Press Enter to continue
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, 14 May 2020 16:01:35 UTC+1, Adam Weremczuk wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Following installation guide for MySQL I've added to /etc/mysql/my.cnf
>>>
>>> [client]
>>> default-character-set=utf8
>>>
>>> [mysqld]
>>> character-set-server=utf8
>>>
>>> MariaDB fails to start:
>>>
>>> May 14 14:01:41 gittest systemd[1]: Starting MariaDB 10.1.44 database
>>> server...
>>> May 14 14:01:41 gittest mysqld[10318]: 2020-05-14 14:01:41
>>> 139687784537472 [Note] /usr/sbin/mysqld (mysqld 10.1.44-MariaDB-0+deb9u1)
>>> starting as process 10318 ...
>>> May 14 14:01:41 gittest mysqld[10318]: 2020-05-14 14:01:41
>>> 139687784537472 [ERROR] COLLATION 'utf8mb4_general_ci' is not valid for
>>> CHARACTER SET 'utf8'
>>> May 14 14:01:41 gittest mysqld[10318]: 2020-05-14 14:01:41
>>> 139687784537472 [ERROR] Aborting
>>> May 14 14:01:41 gittest systemd[1]: mariadb.service: Main process
>>> exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
>>> May 14 14:01:41 gittest systemd[1]: Failed to start MariaDB 10.1.44
>>> database server.
>>>
>>> When I comment out these 2 addition it starts fine and I can retrieve
>>> the following:
>>>
>>> MariaDB [(none)]> SHOW COLLATION LIKE 'utf8%';
>>>
>>> +--+-+-+-+--+-+
>>> | Collation| Charset | Id  | Default | Compiled |
>>> Sortlen |
>>>
>>> +--+-+-+-+--+-+
>>> | utf8_general_ci  | utf8|  33 | Yes | Yes  |
>>>1 |
>>> | utf8_bin | utf8|  83 | | Yes  |
>>>1 |
>>> | utf8_unicode_ci  | utf8| 192 | | Yes  |
>>>8 |
>>> | utf8_icelandic_ci| utf8| 193 | | Yes  |
>>>8 |
>>> | utf8_latvian_ci  | utf8| 194 | | Yes  |
>>>8 |
>>> | utf8_romanian_ci | utf8| 195 | | Yes  |
>>>8 |
>>> | utf8_slovenian_ci| utf8| 196 | | Yes  |
>>>8 |
>>> | 

Re: error installing mysqlclient

[Adam Weremczuk]

Hi Christian,

I've figured this out myself.

"libmariadbclient-dev" appears to be working for MariaDB and
"libmysqlclient-dev" for MySQL

Thanks,
Adam

On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 04:42, Christian Hammond 
wrote:

> Hi Adam,
>
> Try installing the mariadb-devel package from yum and then re-installing
> the mysqlclient Python package.
>
> The pymysql package is not supported by Django (at least not the version
> used by Review Board).
>
> I'll see about updating the docs for MariaDB.
>
> Christian
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:12 AM Adam Weremczuk 
> wrote:
>
>> I've tried "sudo pip install pymysql" instead which installed fine.
>>
>> Now when running "rb-site install" I'm not presented with MySQL / MariaDB
>> option at all:
>>
>> * What database type will you be using?
>>
>>
>> You can type either the name or the number from the list below.
>>
>>
>> (1) sqlite3 (not supported for production use)
>>
>>
>> Database Type:
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure if it's related to mysqlclient or the other issue I've had:
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/reviewboard/rm3UK8n5gbE/d_EOTcr8CQAJ
>>
>> --
>> 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
>> "Review Board Community" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/12dd45b1-b9a0-4162-b623-d9d17b82fb7d%40googlegroups.com
>> 
>> .
>>
>
>
> --
> Christian Hammond
> President/CEO of Beanbag 
> Makers of Review Board 
>
> --
> 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
> "Review Board Community" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CAE7Vndnm6kz-66Lc3hNZMj63HoenEnnUiDnL5Xpe_Xd1X_1-4Q%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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 
"Review Board Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CALC-DAEh0q8yLArD2QwFSP5QwJ3TLn6EF4GzLyXji4Xx-7w0Jw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Create likes to award for excellent piece of code or for an excellent review comment

[Paul Mansfield]

how about everybody gets one(?) gold star a day they can award to a
good review or a good file/diff?

On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 04:43, Christian Hammond
 wrote:
>
> I like the idea as well. We've discussed ideas to motivate quality code 
> reviews in the past. I think it's something we'd like to explore in the 
> future.
>
> If there are any ideas in the community on how this might look, please share 
> :)
>
> Christian
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 4:50 AM Paul Mansfield 
>  wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 20:26, Dmitriy Matison  wrote:
>> > For the latter I want to award a guy with a like or some sort of a bounty 
>> > badge.
>>
>> I like this idea, Dmitriy is right, a code review can be a daunting
>> thing for someone who's a new coder and can often leave people feeling
>> battered and bruised if they did some complex work which needed
>> refinement!
>>
>> --
>> 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 
>> "Review Board Community" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CAMukpcBDETvgbqHz_NdNftY4xFJT%3DSnKjZTyAMUTxthufZ1Vug%40mail.gmail.com.
>
>
>
> --
> Christian Hammond
> President/CEO of Beanbag
> Makers of Review Board
>
> --
> 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 
> "Review Board Community" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CAE7VndnqHwsFGL5657vnWKQ69U%3DNCfiFKna4XWOqK95a_zbc4g%40mail.gmail.com.



-- 
P Mansfield, Senior DevOps Engineer, Agile Analog Ltd
GPG fingerprint: 8BC9D73EE3D4669C1C138ABD41D5B0C9030D4AE6

-- 
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 
"Review Board Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/CAMukpcBsW%3DYShApDwCm86Furo5ZEiNY%2BfUxPRa%3DdDEDuRrH2Lw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Not able to update diff with umlaut characters

[Vinayak Awasare]

Hi Christian,

Thanks for reply.

We will check issue from our side once again.


Regards,
Vinayak

On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 9:40:27 AM UTC+5:30, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> So a couple of issues that I'm seeing (and it may not be limited to these):
>
> 1) Your diff file doesn't appear to be UTF-8. There's some other encoding 
> in the filenames. You might have to figure out the situation there and deal 
> with it on your end. Encodings and diffs and filenames are a giant mess 
> that you may have to figure out your own applicable solution to.
> 2) Your script appears to be thinking it's a Unicode string that it can 
> encode to UTF-8 (judging by the error output — that doesn't really match 
> your example code). Instead, the file contents should be binary, and you 
> should ensure that on Windows by using a file mode of 'rb' instead of 'r' 
> when opening it, and then passing that directly.
>
> Since this is a custom integration, I can't spend a lot of time helping to 
> debug this here. We do offer more hands-on assistance with custom 
> integrations of this level as part of a Premium Support 
>  contract, which I can talk to you 
> more about.
>
> Christian
>
> On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 1:51 AM Vinayak Awasare  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> Thanks for reply.
>>
>> *Please find attached diff zip file.*
>>
>>
>> *Following is my code which is uploading diff*
>>
>> f = open("D:\\gen_diff.diff", mode="r")
>> diff_contents = f.read()
>> f.close()
>> review_request.get_diffs().upload_diff(diff_contents)
>>
>> *Following is the error which occurred at my end :*
>>
>>  Error while posting review request with message :
>>  Remote end closed connection without response
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>   File "rb.py", line 441, in _run
>> rbtools_client.post_review_request(review_request, diff_contents, 
>> codeline_name, summary, description, myjobs, options_info, 
>> existing_reviewers_people, existing_reviewers_group, 
>> description_text_type=description_text_type)
>>   File 
>> "D:\Workspace\Perforce\vawasar_IND-AWASARE_CDE2020-DEV-VA_7046\Tools\RBTools\source\rbtools_wrapper.py",
>>  
>> line 149, in post_review_request
>> review_request.get_diffs().upload_diff(diff_contents.encode("UTF-8"))
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\site-packages\rbtools\api\decorators.py", line 
>> 27, in request_method
>> *args, **kwargs)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\site-packages\rbtools\api\transport\sync.py", 
>> line 77, in execute_request_method
>> return self._execute_request(request)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\site-packages\rbtools\api\transport\sync.py", 
>> line 86, in _execute_request
>> rsp = self.server.make_request(request)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\site-packages\rbtools\api\request.py", line 685, 
>> in make_request
>> request.url, body, headers, request.method))
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\site-packages\rbtools\api\cache.py", line 209, in 
>> make_request
>> return self.urlopen(request)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\urllib\request.py", line 223, in urlopen
>> return opener.open(url, data, timeout)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\urllib\request.py", line 526, in open
>> response = self._open(req, data)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\urllib\request.py", line 544, in _open
>> '_open', req)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\urllib\request.py", line 504, in _call_chain
>> result = func(*args)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\urllib\request.py", line 1346, in http_open
>> return self.do_open(http.client.HTTPConnection, req)
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\urllib\request.py", line 1321, in do_open
>> r = h.getresponse()
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\http\client.py", line 1331, in getresponse
>> response.begin()
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\http\client.py", line 297, in begin
>> version, status, reason = self._read_status()
>>   File "D:\Python36\lib\http\client.py", line 266, in _read_status
>> raise RemoteDisconnected("Remote end closed connection without"
>> http.client.RemoteDisconnected: Remote end closed connection without 
>> response
>>
>> Really appreciate your help.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vinayak
>>
>> On Saturday, May 9, 2020 at 9:20:18 AM UTC+5:30, Christian Hammond wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks, Vinayak,
>>>
>>> Would you mind outputting the diff to a file and zipping it in some 
>>> form, and then sending it here? That’ll help preserve encodings, which will 
>>> be necessary to take a closer look.
>>>
>>> I can’t promise I can get you a resolution right away, as I’m extremely 
>>> swamped right now, but if we can find a clear flaw in some part of RBTools 
>>> or Review Board that we can get into the next release, we’ll definitely do 
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 02:50 Vinayak Awasare  
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Christian,

 Thanks for quick response.

 My RBTools version :
 RBTools  1.0.3
 ReviewBoard server   3.0.15