Sorry, I never got around to debugging this and haven't had any more
reports of problems from users, so I think we can ignore it for now and
investigate further if other people bump into it.
--
Bruce
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Bruce Cran wrote:
> From debugging earlier today, added_empt
Hi Eugene,
Review Board will, on demand, access the repository in order to generate diffs.
This may happen when the author of a change uploads a patch, or when another
user views it, or when a user accesses the New Review Request page, or as the
result of an API call or script, or other circums
We have multiple SVN repositories (all of them on internal company
network). Access to them is controlled on a group-basis.
When adding SVN repo to RB (2.0.6) it requires username and password.
However, creating a dedicated generic username for each repo/user-group and
then managing access both
I've successfully migrated a ReviewBoard instance from version 1.6 running on
CentOS 5 to version 1.7.25 running on CentOS 6. Well, almost successfully: we
can't download attachments from the new instance. The apache logs show that it
is looking for the files in /rb/htdocs/uploaded/files/... w
Has anyone attempted StarTeam integration?
Any rough guess as to the effort required to integrate to a repository
implementation, specifically StarTeam?
Thanks,
Greg
--
Get the Review Board Power Pack at http://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/
---
Sign up for Review Board hosting at RBCommons: h
I've also seen this timestamp warning in the logs quite regularly: I don't
know if it's related, but the times in the logs are 7 hours ahead - we're
in UTC-7. The times within the web interface are correct.
--
Bruce
On Monday, August 25, 2014, Greg Burcher wrote:
> Thanks for the updates!
>
>
Thanks for the updates!
13:42:37 WARNING -
/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/Django-1.6.5-py2.7.egg/django/db/models/fields/__init__.py:848:
RuntimeWarning: DateTimeField Review.timestamp received a naive datetime
(2014-07-17 00:00:00) while time zone support is
