-
-
> (1) Would you maybe be willing to view hostname mismatches as something that will yield fatal errors for the end user > and will therefore motivate folks to advertise and stick to a canonical hostname if they want things to work? (That is, > maybe "un-ask" the feature request? Sigh, ok, didn't think so.) I'm personally not against that, but given a diverse group of developers trying to attempt addition of reviewboard to existing projects, I see the strict hostname acceptance that reviewboard's CVS adaptor implements as a barrier to acceptance of reviewboard as a new addition to the tool chain. > (2) Next thing that makes me nervous is that byname() and byaddr() may get stuck for 30 or 120 seconds before timing > out on distant nameservers and eventually returning to you. Probably that's OK, here, but sprinkling debug()s might help > end users diagnose such delays. Delayed return from the oft-troublesome byaddr() could be avoided if the code is able > to just use a dotted-quad instead. The only problem with just using dotted quads is that then your reviewboard configuration isn't resilient in the face of CVS server migration. (Using dotted quads was actually my first thought.) > The bottom line is that if you don't really really need to call gethostbyaddr(), then avoid calling it, since it can yield odd > results and take a long time to do so. You might decide that socket.getfqdn() offers enough functionality to address your > needs. Will do.
-
-
Make post-review less sensitive to CVS server name aliases
Review Request #576 — Created Oct. 1, 2008 and submitted
You might have many aliases for your CVS server. People can set up their sandboxes using any of these names. Unfortunately, if the hostname used in the reviewboard repository definition doesn't match what the user used in their cvs checkout command, post-review will barf. This patch converts the local hostname to the canonical name for the machine. When setting up the CVS repository object all you have to do is use the canonical name for the server.
Confirmed that it worked for our setup at work. Note however that we have a kind of odd behind-a-firewall network setup. The canonical name doesn't include any domain information. This patch might need adjustment to be more robust in a more normal network setup.