Ok great, thanks!
Sent from my iPhone
> On 29 Nov 2017, at 20:49, Christian Hammond wrote:
>
> The fix will be included in 2.5.17 and 3.0.1. I expect we’ll get 2.5.17 out
> in about a week.
>
> Christian
>
>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 05:31 'Rob Ba
eviewboard.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.
eived 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.
gt; missing).
>>
>> // Erik
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2017 12:44, "'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard" <
>> revie...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> Ah yes sorry missed that...I have added it i
not ..." (i.e. not is missing).
>
> // Erik
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2017 12:44, "'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard" <
> revie...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> Ah yes sorry missed that...I have added it in but I get the same error
>
Note the
> standalone 'hasattr' call on the line preceding the if statement. The
> workaround is to call that in a standalone way to prime a cache and avoid
> the error.
>
> Christian
>
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 1:17 AM, 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard <
ut 5 lines of your modification?
>
> Christian
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 18:01 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard <
> revie...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> It crashes straight away with this error...
>>
>
e first call on a
> given review request will fail, and the second will succeed (internal state
> caching stuff). This should allow a full index to proceed.
>
> It's a temporary fix until we get the next release out.
>
> Christian
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:48
line 87, in
prepare
raise SearchFieldError("The model '%s' does not have a model_attr
'%s'." % (repr(current_object), attr))
SearchFieldError: The model '' does not have a model_attr
'username'.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/us
, Oct 16, 2017 at 07:46 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard
>> wrote:
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> Here you go...
>>
>> ERROR:root:Error updating reviews using default
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> File
>> &qu
y", line 166, in
prepare
return self.convert(super(CharField, self).prepare(obj))
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/haystack/fields.py", line 90, in
prepare
getattr(current_object, attr)
File
"/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/reviewboard/reviews/models/rev
s -- %s)." % (obj.__class__.__name__,
current_object.pk, current_object.__class__.__module__,
current_object.__class__.__name__, inspect.getfile(obj.__class__), id(obj),
id(current_object), attr, hasattr(current_object, attr), has_attr))
SearchFieldError: The model 'ReviewRequest
No probs - where do we go from here?
Thanks
Rob
On Thursday, 12 October 2017 19:58:13 UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Ok, I just wanted to rule out an easy solution.
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 5:47 AM 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard <
> revie...@googlegroups.com
Just to add, the haystack version shown in the reviewboard shell is looking
better now though.
>>> import reviewboard
>>> print reviewboard.VERSION
(2, 5, 16, 0, u'final', 0, True)
>>> print reviewboard.__file__
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/reviewb
Hi Stephen,
I've installed that on our test system and re-run the index - unfortunately
the same problem.
Thanks
Rob
On Wednesday, 11 October 2017 19:21:22 UTC+1, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:40 AM 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard &l
'ascii' codec can't decode byte 0xe2 in position 68:
ordinal not in range(128)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/rb-site", line 9, in
load_entry_point('ReviewBoard==2.5.16', 'console_scripts', 'rb-site')()
File
args['null'] = True
if 'facet_for' in kwargs:
self.facet_for = kwargs['facet_for']
del(kwargs['facet_for'])
return kwargs
def get_facet_for_name(self):
return self.facet_for or self.instance_name
class Facet
x27; -- ReviewRequest) does not have a
model_attr 'commit' (True).
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/rb-site", line 9, in
load_entry_point('ReviewBoard==2.5.16', 'console_scripts', 'rb-site')()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/r
/easy_install though so if you can
suggest any tricks to show for sure, that would be great.
Thanks
Rob
Sent from my iPhone
> On 6 Oct 2017, at 19:10, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Rob, did you install ReviewBoard using pip or using the EPEL 7 RPM?
>
> From above, it looks like you may
27;ll see if that logic
> differs from what is in 2.3.1.
>
> Christian
>
>> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:25 AM, 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard
>> wrote:
>> Sorry, which one line?
>>
>>> On Friday, 6 October 2017 00:59:12 UTC+1, Christian Hammond wr
range.
>
> Could you show me that one line in fields.py?
>
> Christian
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 13:22 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard <
> revie...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> We deinately only have version 2.3.1
t; I upgraded our ReviewBoard system from 2.5.10 to 2.5.16 - since then,
> indexing doesn't seem to complete.
> The index starts OK, but after a while stops with this error...
>
> ERROR:root:Error updating reviews using default
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File
>
;
>
>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 05:28 'Rob Backhurst' via reviewboard
>> wrote:
>> Perhaps we're able to add some kind of debugging to the indexing to provide
>> more info?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>> On Tuesday
Perhaps we're able to add some kind of debugging to the indexing to provide
more info?
Thanks
Rob
On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 09:12:26 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I upgraded our ReviewBoard system from 2.5.10 to 2.5.16 - since then,
> indexing doesn't seem
Here you go...
>>> import reviewboard
>>> print reviewboard.VERSION
(2, 5, 16, 0, u'final', 0, True)
>>> print reviewboard.__file__
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/reviewboard/__init__.pyc
>>> import haystack
>>> print haystack.__version__
t;>> from reviewboard.reviews.models import ReviewRequest
>>> r = ReviewRequest.objects.get(pk=1)
>>> print hasattr(r, 'commit')
True
>>>
Cheers
Rob
On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 09:12:26 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I upgraded our
Hi Christian,
Thanks for getting back to me.
Is this what you're after?
python-django-haystack.noarch
2.3.1-1.el7
Thanksl
Rob
On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 09:12:26 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I upgraded our ReviewBoard syst
Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I upgraded our ReviewBoard system from 2.5.10 to 2.5.16 - since then,
> indexing doesn't seem to complete.
> The index starts OK, but after a while stops with this error...
>
> ERROR:root:Error updating reviews using default
> Traceback (
Hi,
I upgraded our ReviewBoard system from 2.5.10 to 2.5.16 - since then,
indexing doesn't seem to complete.
The index starts OK, but after a while stops with this error...
ERROR:root:Error updating reviews using default
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/usr/lib/pyth
iew Board admin UI?
>
> -David
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 6:12 PM eric via reviewboard <
> reviewboard@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> Very confused. Perhaps this is fixed by an upgrade? I'm running 2.5.9.
>>
>> I've got a user who clones a Git repos
ode = self.main(*args) or 0
File
"/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/RBTools-0.7.10-py2.7.egg/rbtools/commands/post.py",
line 812, in main
(msg_prefix, e))
rbtools.commands.CommandError: Error validating diff
What's going on, and how do I fix it?
Eric
--
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.
Hi Christian,
You'll have to excuse me, i do't use ReviewBoard myself so just relaying
messages from our dev team.
When you do this then you are unable to add a diff at a later stage.
It creates the form as a non-repository form.
The workflow we sometimes use is:
1. Create form a
ify the problematic dupes
(or other issue that might be causing the problem) ?
---
Thanks
Rob
On Friday, 26 May 2017 09:24:00 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We have recently upgraded our ReviewBoard from version 1.7.22 to 2.5.10 -
> as well as also upgrading from RHEL 6.x
et 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.
request are administrators or those with special permissions set.
>
> Anyone should be able to comment on any file attachment after it's been
> published. Is that not working?
>
> What version did you upgrade from?
>
> Christian
>
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:10 AM, &
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"
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 i
> Thanks for the quick response.
> I'm not particularly comfortable with SQL but i'll ask a colleague if he
> can help out - i'll let you know.
>
> Thanks
> Rob
>
> On Friday, 26 May 2017 09:24:00 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>
Hi Christian,
Thanks for the quick response.
I'm not particularly comfortable with SQL but i'll ask a colleague if he
can help out - i'll let you know.
Thanks
Rob
On Friday, 26 May 2017 09:24:00 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We have recently upgraded o
Hi,
We have recently upgraded our ReviewBoard from version 1.7.22 to 2.5.10 -
as well as also upgrading from RHEL 6.x to CentOS 7.3.1611.
Since then we have a review that cannot be interacted with...can't post a
new review or comment, adjust existing comments etc - or even delete the
r
.
>
> We're getting a fix in for 2.5.10.
>
> -David
>
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:39 AM eric via reviewboard <
> reviewboard@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> I recently upgraded our deployment of ReviewBoard from 2.0.X to 2.5.9.
>> Now, some of my reviewbo
I recently upgraded our deployment of ReviewBoard from 2.0.X to 2.5.9. Now,
some of my reviewboard instance owners are reporting that they cannot edit
review groups.
Specifically, on this page: ${server_root_path}/admin/db/reviews/group/1/
the UI for removing users from the a review group
of doing code reviews is to have someone else
look at your code changes, in the hopes that they will discover a latent
bug that you have missed, presentation of the code changes is of paramount
importance. The algorithm ReviewBoard uses obfuscates the changes because
of it considers blank lines
;t realize that the used pgp key (id_rsa) is associated
to a dedicated reviewboard user called "reviewboard".
That was my first mistake. I thought the key is associated to the user
www-data. A talk with our svn administrator helped a lot.
The second problem was related to the permission
2:43:01 PM UTC-7, Vipul Singh wrote:
>
> hello
> i am getting http 500 internal error whenever i try to publish a new
> review request. my reviewboard is running on CentOs 7.
> Here is my log file :-
>
> [Mon Sep 26 20:01:16.923283 2016] [:error] [pid 12652]
> ERROR:root:
r
> complete new files but not for already existing files which are only
> modified.
> I just called: $rbt post -d
>
> First of all some information about my software and system used:
> ReviewBoard 2.5.6.1
> RBTools: 0.7.6
> Python: 2.7.9
> OS: Linux debian-8.1 64 bit (Vir
nformation about my software and system used:
ReviewBoard 2.5.6.1
RBTools: 0.7.6
Python: 2.7.9
OS: Linux debian-8.1 64 bit (Virtual Machine)
So far I managed to add a repository to the review board, so the RSA key
seems to be fine. I can also login into the review board (command line: rbt
login)
/dist-packages/rbtools/commands/post.py",
line 426, in post_request
raise CommandError('Error creating review request: %s' % e)
rbtools.commands.CommandError: Error creating review request: You are not
logged in (HTTP 401, API Error 103)
cwestin@qa-node66:~/hg/dev1$
On Wednesday, September 14,
p://reviewboard.corp.maprtech.com";
REPOSITORY = "MapR Trunk Repo"
On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 12:44:25 PM UTC-7, Christian Hammond
wrote:
>
> You can pass --debug to the RBTools command line.
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond
> President/CEO of Beanba
t; On Tuesday, September 13, 2016, 'Chris Westin' via reviewboard <
> revie...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
>> So, no resolution to this? I'm seeing the exact same thing on a fresh
>> install on Ubuntu. Everything is stock.
>>
>> On Thursday, Febr
files
>
> On windows 2003 this file is in:
>
> C:\Documents and Settings\THEUSER\Application Data for THEUSER
>
> and
>
> c:\windows\system32 for SYSTEM account
>
> To get a valid cookie, I logged in reviewboard using the account I
> intend to use with "rbto
debug" option might be useful. For example, when rbt is using ssl, what
version of OPENSSL is getting invoked?
In any case, I did get a bunch further with this. I failed to note a
critical piece of information in my original post - I'm running on a Mac
(10.11.X).
There seem to be three
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.
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.
oundations.
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Hammond
> President/CEO of Beanbag <https://www.beanbaginc.com/>
> Makers of Review Board <https://www.reviewboard.org/>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 4:14 AM, 'Walder Röhrl' via reviewboard <
> revie...@goog
com)
>> wrote:
>>
>> ok, so I have a setup where my company's root svn is different from the
>> projects that people checkout. In otherwords, each project is setup as only
>> a folder in svn.
>>
>> so svn info shows:
>> URL: https://url.org/svn/
eview 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
ore
I'm going to start this again...will let you know how it goes.
Thanks
Rob
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 16:06:04 UTC+1, Rob Backhurst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm doing a test upgrade from ReviewBoard 1.7.9 to 2.5.4 but 'rb-site
> upgrade' fails...
>
> # rb-site
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__.
*** '
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.6.1-py2.7.egg/reviewboard/notifications/email.py",
line 691, in send_review_mail
message.send()
File
"/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/Django-1.6.11-py2.7.egg/django/core/ma
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__
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
>>>
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,
>
ind out more, and if so, what?
>
>
> Eric.
>
>
>
> On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 1:49:53 PM UTC-7, Christian Hammond wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> Hmm, we'll need to look into that. Is there a way you'd be able to send
>> us the diff for
there a way you'd be able to send us
> the diff for that? (I can help you find it.) We will need a copy in order
> to diagnose this. We can sign an NDA for it.
>
> Christian
>
>
> On Friday, May 13, 2016, eric via reviewboard > wrote:
>
>> After I migrated
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.4-py2.7.egg/reviewboard/diffviewer/views.py",
line 275, in get
response = renderer.render_to_response(request)
File
"/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/ReviewBoard-2.5.4-py2.7.egg/revie
https://www.beanbaginc.com/>
> Makers of Review Board <https://www.reviewboard.org/>
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:07 AM, eric via reviewboard <
> revie...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
>> I'm getting ready to roll out the latest ReviewBoard for my company.
>>
I'm getting ready to roll out the latest ReviewBoard for my company.
Upgrade went smoothly. Looks like you've even fully integrated a patch I
submitted a while back (thanks for that!)
While I was at it, I figured I should turn on indexing for the first time.
After doing a:
rb-s
Hi,
I'm doing a test upgrade from ReviewBoard 1.7.9 to 2.5.4 but 'rb-site
upgrade' fails...
# rb-site upgrade /var/www/my-site/
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/rb-site", line 9, in
load_entry_point('ReviewBoard==2.5.4', 'console_
he commit log message
> 4. Setup a user local .reviewboardrc configuration file from TortoiseSVN
> settings dialog
>
> I'm new to the open source world. Is that change of any value to the
> ReviewBoard community? If so how can I share source and binaries?
> and
achments_fileattachment
> DROP COLUMN attachment_revision, DROP COLUMN attachment_history_id
> 160115 19:34:58 2197763 Query ALTER TABLE diffviewer_filediff DROP
> COLUMN raw_diff_hash_id, DROP COLUMN raw_parent_diff_hash_id
> 160115 19:36:18 2197763 Query ALTER TABLE `reviews_gro
This is a rather old thread, so I hope the people discussing here are still
in the group.
My question: reading this says to me, that reviewboard simply can not be
used with Mercurial over ssh. And still not in 2016. Am I right here?
Thanks and Cheers, Wolfgang
Am Donnerstag, 19. Mai 2011 08
Hi,
I installed reviewboard using easy_install. I've version 2.5.3 in place.
I've created a repository within reviewboard, it's a Mercurial repo,
connected via ssh. My configuration is:
Name: testrepo3
Hosting service: none
Repository type: Mercurial
Path: ssh://wn@192.16
I too had this issue (MySQL default changing from MyISAM to InnoDB).
Although I understand that this is caused by MySQL version being updated at
the same time as a Reviewboard Update (and migrate).
But would there be any way for the 'upgrade' logic of Reviewboard to post a
more us
Hi all,
I got some files that have been renamed using git mv command.
Using git diff with argument "-C" to generate a diff file with file moving
support, reviewboard complains that the files could not be foung in the
repo.
generating diff without "-C" helps a bit but not i
a repo
in RB based on group (group will be assigned to multiple repos), and reviewers
selected from that group. We do not want content of repos or reviews publicly
viewable (or viewable outside the review group).
ENV:
- centos 6 with epel installed Reviewboard 1.7.11
- repo configured in RB (show
Does the following work? (change hb to h)
http://git.ourdomain.com/?p=reponame.git;a=blob_plain;f=path/to/file.txt;h=e4643b1cc6c8c05f17d4079f2d68d078bba96a4c
ref: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/reviewboard/YmrjZyUsvX8/zqEEgtuznpMJ
On Thu, August 1, 2013 9:18 pm, Chris Armstrong wrote:
>
Hey Stephen,
Thanks for the suggestion :). The reviewboard logs generated don't suggest
that there was anything wrong with sending the email for this user which
might be because the error is masked elsewhere. There is nothing unusual
about the name (it is entirely alphabetic).
On Wedn
Hello,
I have a very specific user that can't receive emails via ReviewBoard when
creating requests or updates to the request. I checked this against the
database, and he is an active user with the correct email.
I'm attempting to follow the code to send out an email that would repl
Just completed setting up gitweb and reviewboard. The raw URL format (from the
docs) did not work. Git repos are on a different server than reviewboard and
are access controlled via gitolite. gitweb installed on the git repo server
and runs with file system read access to the git repos. to test
Hi Christian
I managed to get it working as below (just in case these tips come
handy for anyone else)
My working env is
1) ReviewBoard 1.5 installed on RHEL4 with Python 2.4, Subversion 1.4
server, Apache 2.2, Django 1.2
2) Tortoise SVN Client on Windows (1.6) to access SVN over https only.
(http
1. ReviewBoard 1.5
2. Apache 2.2
3. SVN 1.4
4. Python 2.4
Am trying to post a review on a post-commit hook from subversion
Running the below command
/usr/bin/post-review --server=http://server/reviewboard/ --repository-
url=file:///var/svn/repositories/sandbox/ --username=svn '--
passwor
rguments that the post-commit-hook is using, and see what the
> > output is.
>
> > -David
>
> > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:10 AM, ReviewBoard User
> > wrote:
> >> Hi
> >> I am trying to automate post-review on a RHEL4. Here are the specs
> >> 1
Hi
I am trying to automate post-review on a RHEL4. Here are the specs
1. Python 2.4
2. Apache 2.2
4. ReviewBoard 1.05 RC1
5. SVN 1.4.2
I am using the script below on a subversion post-commit-hook
http://github.com/reviewboard/reviewboard/tree/master/contrib/tools
htdocs/media is owned by apache
84 matches
Mail list logo
