Credentials for demo projects?

[Christopher Nelson]

Maybe I'm missing something really obvious but how does one log into
http://trac.edgewall.org/demo-1.0?

[Christian Boos]

On 10/11/2012 5:23 PM, Christopher Nelson wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something really obvious but how does one log into
> http://trac.edgewall.org/demo-1.0?
>

With your edgewall.org credentials?

Which means that if you don't have commit access to at least one of the
Edgewall projects, you can't log in.

If there's any permission that we can add for anonymous without much
risk and which is currently missing on the /demo sites, just ask.

-- Christian

[Christopher Nelson]

> On 10/11/2012 5:23 PM, Christopher Nelson wrote:
>> Maybe I'm missing something really obvious but how does one log into
>> http://trac.edgewall.org/demo-1.0?
>
> With your edgewall.org credentials?
>
> Which means that if you don't have commit access to at least one of the
> Edgewall projects, you can't log in.

Yeah, I don't think I have that.

> If there's any permission that we can add for anonymous without much
> risk and which is currently missing on the /demo sites, just ask.

I don't know what the answer is but as it stands I can't edit a report
or a wiki page in the demo if I can't log in. Can you give anonymous
WIKI_MODIFY and REPORT_whateveritis?

[Christian Boos]

WIKI_CREATE and WIKI_MODIFY were already granted to anonymous (I just
verified on trac-{0.12,1.0,1.1}).

/demo-0.11 is a bit picky about spam, there you need to have your
preferences set, and /demo-0.10 is mostly for us testing how things
behaved there, so no need to worry about this one.

REPORT_EDIT_AND_0WN_THE_SERVER is perhaps asking a bit too much ;-)

-- Christian

[Christopher Nelson]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Christian Boos <christi...@free.fr> wrote:
>>> If there's any permission that we can add for anonymous without much
>>> risk and which is currently missing on the /demo sites, just ask.
>>
>> I don't know what the answer is but as it stands I can't edit a report
>> or a wiki page in the demo if I can't log in. Can you give anonymous
>> WIKI_MODIFY and REPORT_whateveritis?
>
> WIKI_CREATE and WIKI_MODIFY were already granted to anonymous (I just
> verified on trac-{0.12,1.0,1.1}).
>
> /demo-0.11 is a bit picky about spam, there you need to have your
> preferences set, and /demo-0.10 is mostly for us testing how things
> behaved there, so no need to worry about this one.
>
> REPORT_EDIT_AND_0WN_THE_SERVER is perhaps asking a bit too much ;-)

OK. I can see that but what I really wanted to know was: "Do reports
have revision history in 1.0?" I could have looked at the change log
but just *trying it* seemed more straightforward.

[Christian Boos]

On 10/11/2012 7:01 PM, Christopher Nelson wrote:
>
> OK. I can see that but what I really wanted to know was: "Do reports
> have revision history in 1.0?" I could have looked at the change log
> but just *trying it* seemed more straightforward.
>

Or asking, so that we know that people are somewhat expecting/wanting this.

No, not yet.

-- Christian

[Christopher Nelson]

> On 10/11/2012 7:01 PM, Christopher Nelson wrote:
>>
>> OK. I can see that but what I really wanted to know was: "Do reports
>> have revision history in 1.0?" I could have looked at the change log
>> but just *trying it* seemed more straightforward.
>>
>
> Or asking,

Well, yes, but self serve seemed more polite. ;-)

> so that we know that people are somewhat expecting/wanting this.
>
> No, not yet.

I ask because I just spent most of two days (with many false starts)
trying to beat a report into submission and kept copying the
"working-so-far" SQL into comments in the ticket I was using to track
my work. Without report revision history, we're going to resort to
storing them in an external repo and copying them in and out of Trac
with scripts. It works and fits our workflow ("everything in source")
fairly well but if Trac already did that, I could avoid the work of
developing those scripts.

[Steffen Hoffmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11.10.2012 19:09, Christopher Nelson wrote:
> kept copying the "working-so-far" SQL into comments in the ticket I
> was using to track my work. Without report revision history, we're
> going to resort to storing them in an external repo and copying
> them in and out of Trac with scripts.

I'd always use a wiki page, which happens to have the revision history
and diff capability you seem to be asking for.

I can't see that it would be really hard even to create a hack for
pulling reports from per-defined wiki page. Just a thought.

Steffen Hoffmann
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlB2/78ACgkQ31DJeiZFuHcrygCgj8yEoEdh1VB8iSbxVipJf/yS
gq0An3A9dIiGYb/H5wvZb8NoGvzaHBpG
=FRv0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Christopher Nelson]

> On 11.10.2012 19:09, Christopher Nelson wrote:
>> kept copying the "working-so-far" SQL into comments in the ticket I
>> was using to track my work. Without report revision history, we're
>> going to resort to storing them in an external repo and copying
>> them in and out of Trac with scripts.
>
> I'd always use a wiki page, which happens to have the revision history
> and diff capability you seem to be asking for.
>
> I can't see that it would be really hard even to create a hack for
> pulling reports from per-defined wiki page. Just a thought.

Yes, my "deploy report" script could copy wiki/report/<number> to
report/<number> (via SQL). And interesting idea to keep it all in
Trac.

[RjOllos]

On Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:20:10 AM UTC-7, Steffen Hoffmann wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[...]

I'd always use a wiki page, which happens to have the revision history
and diff capability you seem to be asking for.

I can't see that it would be really hard even to create a hack for
pulling reports from per-defined wiki page. Just a thought.

IncludeMacro can probably already do this, and if it can't I'd be happy to deal with the feature request right away.

http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/IncludeMacro  

[Christopher Nelson]

>> [...]

>>
>> I can't see that it would be really hard even to create a hack for
>> pulling reports from per-defined wiki page. Just a thought.
>

> IncludePlugin can possibly already do this, and if it can't I'd be happy to

> deal with the feature request right away.
>
> http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/IncludeMacro

I don't get what you're saying. How could IncludeMacro help me with
revision control of report source? I can't put
[[Include(someRepoReference)]] in the source of a report. I don't get
it.

[Steffen Hoffmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I bet you can't do it as easy as you think.

Take a look at markup processing in
trac.ticket.report.ReportModule._render_view

There is no such thing like WikiMarkup, so the Include macro call
wouldn't even fire.

I'm getting more and more confident, that Trac could do everything you
can imagine from a web application. But certainly this request will
require code that is totally different from everything what is in
Include macro by now.

Steffen Hoffmann
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlB3ZLYACgkQ31DJeiZFuHe3hgCdHTj+6Z+aXZdm8IRgXGejbqM5
vcoAnAg3KY/09DBg2pu1XrgNZhb6dDlY
=u9gr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Steffen Hoffmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12.10.2012 02:15, Christopher Nelson wrote:
> I can't put
> [[Include(someRepoReference)]] in the source of a report.

Sure enough, as I hinted right now as well. It will require to intercept
inner workings of ReportModule by at least monkey-patching a private
method or tho. Still I like the idea to put in a valid wiki page
reference, just a valid TracLink for pulling in the `text` content from
that wiki page and treat it like reports own `sql` column content.
Bonus: support versioned links like wiki:ReportStaging/MyTestRep@5
(since Trac-0.11).

Steffen Hoffmann
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlB3Z08ACgkQ31DJeiZFuHcAiACgufa3psW5EZPdqSrXKOpB3iUe
Pv8AoIK0cl4RUmY/O79YfrfyJYlTV6TK
=U8Gn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[RjOllos]

On Thursday, October 11, 2012 5:16:08 PM UTC-7, Chris Nelson wrote:

I don't get what you're saying.  How could IncludeMacro help me with 
revision control of report source?  I can't put
[[Include(someRepoReference)]] in the source of a report.  I don't get
it.

Yeah, it was a short-sighted and stupid comment. Please ignore, and eventually I hope to win back some credibility ;)