bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Chambers <>
Subject Re: Dogfooding multi product on i.a.o/bloodhound
Date Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:56:41 GMT
I think we might be getting ahead of ourselves by expecting INFRA to take
over the running of this Bloodhound instance. I would expect that to happen
only after other projects started to use bloodhound for their issue
tracking and wiki.

However this is the instance we use for dogfooding and so I think that I
should be concentrating on getting a working version of bloodhound 0.8.0
with all the tickets and attachments and external links working as they do
now. But as part of a multi product installation.

I think involving INFRA at this stage could be counter productive because
they may ask for more than I am able to give at the present time.

I don't know enough about managing an instance of Bloodhound to answer your
question about the redirect Gary. Maybe we need the involvement of the
developers who implemented multi product to explain further.

Like I said previously my next step is to install a separate instance of
Bloodhound 0.8.0 on the server to see if we can access it externally
without any changes by INFRA. If that works then I will migrate the
existing tickets etc and setup the redirect so hopefully we can continue to
use the system as is.


On 17 Feb 2015 19:22, "Gary Martin" <> wrote:

> On 17/02/15 14:28, John Chambers wrote:
>> Ok I think we have a plan. Now I just need to figure out how to implement
>> it ;)
>> The only thing is I think I am going to have to involve INFRA because I
>> think the only way into our VM is via
>> bloodhound
>> and I don't think making any config changes to the Apache2 config on the
>> vm
>> will allow external access via another url i.e
>> I am going to try and test this by installing a new instance of bloodhound
>> 0.8.0 on the VM and try and access it via the above url. If this is not
>> possible I will raise this with INFRA. They may also be the ones who can
>> setup the redirect from to
>> I will keep you informed.
>> Cheers
>> John
> Yes, it is probably wise to talk with INFRA about this to figure out what
> they need to do. With our assumption that they will eventually take control
> of the running, they might wish to assert their preference instead. I don't
> think we need to be overly attached to a particular path.
> Incidentally, I think I specified the wrong redirect in my last message as
> we use products rather than product so that redirect should be:
> =>
> bhound/products/BLOODHOUND
> So, has anyone got any problems with this part of the plan? Is there
> anything that anyone thinks will come back to haunt us?
> Cheers,
>     Gary

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message