Opened 6 years ago

Closed 5 years ago

Last modified 5 years ago

#51 closed change (fixed)

Set up Rietveld on our own infrastructure

Reported by: christian Assignee: matze
Priority: P3 Milestone:
Module: Infrastructure Keywords:
Cc: fhd, sebastian, trev Blocked By:
Blocking: #2182 Platform: Unknown
Ready: no Confidential: no
Tester: Verified working: no
Review URL(s):

http://codereview.adblockplus.org/5459448122310656/

Description (last modified by fhd)

Background

We want to have Rietveld running on our own infrastructure.

What to change

  • Write Exporter
  • Write Importer
  • Test Importer
  • Write Puppet Scripts
  • Set up user accounts

Change History (19)

comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by trev

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Summary changed from Setting up rietveld on our own Infrastructur to Set up Rietveld on our own infrastructure

comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by fhd

  • Reporter changed from philll to fhd

comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by fhd

  • Status changed from new to assigned

comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by fhd

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Reporter changed from fhd to christian

comment:5 Changed 6 years ago by fhd

  • Priority changed from Unknown to P3

comment:6 Changed 6 years ago by fhd

  • Cc fhd added
  • Ready unset

comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by christian

just a short round up over the rietveld status:

  • Deploying works
  • Getting all data out of rietveld
  • Setting the right issue numbers at import
  • Getting the comments to the issues
  • Setting meta information like owner
  • Extend API to change the meta information with a script
  • Import script works pretty stable, need more error handling

Not working:

  • change the ID of the patchsets, because the ID have to be global uniq and not uniq in context of the issue -> rewrite with a htaccess
  • The comments are not shown in the diffs inline, there is no API maybe some little changes in the database can help -> start testing this and extend import script

comment:8 Changed 5 years ago by philll

  • Status changed from assigned to new

The assigned state will be dropped by #403

comment:9 Changed 5 years ago by sebastian

  • Cc sebastian added

comment:10 Changed 5 years ago by christian

Write a little bit of how to make a rietveld migration. It will be updatet and correct and you can find it here

# Manual for rietveld migration

I would recommend to use vagrant for running an testing, you have to install django to get this working.

  • Create a folder rietveld and cd in it
  • Download all migration scripts https://gist.github.com/sangyye/2b32cfb91f70af275749
  • hg clone https://code.google.com/p/django-gae2django/ and cd in it.
  • Change in the folder examples/rietveld and open the Makefile and change the hg repo link to "hg clone ssh://hg@bitbucket.org/adblockplus/rietveld -r importer rietveld.hg" and comment out the patch calls. (you need permissions for the repo, just ask me)
  • go back to the main folder and run vagrant up to start up our virtual Machine and than vagrant ssh to enter it. and change to /vagrant/django-gae2django/examples/rietveld
  • run sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install python-django make mercurial
  • run make all && follow the instructions
  • run './manage.py runserver 10.0.2.15:8000' congrants your own rietveld with my changes is running open your browser with the 'localhost:3030'

### Export Data of the existing rietveld
create a folder called export and cd in it. Just start the ruby ../fetch_issue.rb skript, it will end with ../fetch_issues.rb:35:in <main>': undefined method click' for nil:NilClass (NoMethodError) this will be fixed in a future version.

### Import the Data in the created rietveld instance
First of all you need to copy the upload.py (should be at django-gae2django/examples/rietveld/upload.py it's a symlink, don't copy that) in the same place upload_issues.rb, and you should change the server name if it's something other than localhost:3030, all you need to do than is call the skript out of the folder were your backup is saved.

comment:11 Changed 5 years ago by trev

  • Blocking 1194 added

comment:12 Changed 5 years ago by matze

  • Cc trev added
  • Owner changed from christian to matze
  • Platform set to Unknown
  • Review URL(s) modified (diff)

This ticket is in progress since spring this year (although it was never marked as "Ready"), hasn't seen an update in months, seems to have a LGTM in codereview (wasn't linked before, now it is) and has been pushed already (406:959c15eec9b3).

I assume one just forgot to close the ticket - or do I miss something here?

PS: Since Christian is not here any more and because I cannot "un-assign" a ticket, I've assigned this ticket to me, for now.

comment:13 Changed 5 years ago by trev

The main part here was never setting up Rietveld, importing the existing data is - and that one is still "in progress" unfortunately.

comment:14 Changed 5 years ago by philll

We really should ensure our isues being precise and complete before anybody starts working on anything.

comment:15 Changed 5 years ago by fhd

I've created #1543 for the actual migration. I suggest we change this ticket to only be about setting up a Rietveld server via Puppet. As Matze said, that's already reviewed and pushed, so the issue can be closed.

comment:16 Changed 5 years ago by trev

  • Blocking 1194 removed

comment:17 Changed 5 years ago by matze

  • Blocking 2182 added
  • Resolution set to incomplete
  • Status changed from new to closed

I've created #2182 as a meta-ticket for any further action, covering #51 and #1543 as well.

comment:18 Changed 5 years ago by fhd

  • Resolution incomplete deleted
  • Status changed from closed to reopened

Can be closed as fixed actually - this has landed back then.

Last edited 5 years ago by fhd (previous) (diff)

comment:19 Changed 5 years ago by fhd

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from reopened to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.