Re: [Apache Bloodhound] #154: Installer fails when providing repository type without a path and vice versa

[Gary Martin <ga...@wandisco.com>]

Hi,

I just updated this ticket so that there is plenty more information to 
help a new contributor.

It is not a ticket that is likely to teach anything important about the 
workings of Bloodhound/Trac but it wouldn't hurt to have more people 
aware of how the initial configuration works.

Cheers,
     Gary


On 28/09/12 18:11, Apache Bloodhound wrote:
> #154: Installer fails when providing repository type without a path and vice
> versa
> ------------------------+-----------------------
>    Reporter:  gjm        |      Owner:  nobody
>        Type:  defect     |     Status:  assigned
>    Priority:  major      |  Milestone:  Release 2
>   Component:  installer  |    Version:
> Resolution:             |   Keywords:  starter
> ------------------------+-----------------------
> Changes (by gjm):
>
>   * owner:  gjm => nobody
>   * status:  new => assigned
>
>
> Comment:
>
>   This may be difficult for a starter to interpret without further comment.
>   So...
>
>   The failure of the installation is because if someone runs one of these
>   commands in the setup phase:
>
>   {{{
>   python bloodhound_setup.py -d sqlite --admin-password=password
>   --repository-type=svn
>   }}}
>   or
>   {{{
>   python bloodhound_setup.py -d sqlite --admin-password=password
>   --repository-path=/path/to/repo
>   }}}
>
>   you will see the output
>   {{{
>   Initenv for
>   '/home/gjm/projects/bloodhound_dev/trunk/installer/bloodhound/environments/main'
>   failed.
>   Wrong number of arguments: 3
>   }}}
>   followed by a traceback.
>
>   The traceback itself is because the trac.do_initenv method (around line
>   179 of installer/bloodhound_setup.py) completes unsuccessfully but without
>   throwing an exception, causing a problem for later code when an expected
>   path doesn't exist. Or something like that.
>
>   We can avoid the problem by making sure that we either pass both the
>   repository type and repository path or neither.
>
>   I am still torn on whether we need to stop the setup when either is
>   missing so perhaps it would be better to output a warning saying that the
>   repository specification was ignored.
>