Apparently, c74a74dc74 introduced a bug
where we are no longer correctly depending on build-essential as part
of the Zulip development environment installation process.
Fixes#1111.
This is needed because hash_reqs.py is used to create a virtualenv.
Currently we only use virtualenv in development, but we will soon
start using it in production. Scripts used in production should be
put in scripts/.
Camo is a caching image proxy, used in Zulip to avoid mixed-content
warnings by proxying HTTP image content over HTTPS. We've been using
it in zulip.com production for years; this change makes it available
in standalone Zulip deployments.
The main function of prompting inside `manage.py migrate` is to ask
the user if they want to delete stale content-types, which is
unimportant and likely scary, so we disable doing so.
This automatically loads settings, zerver.models.* and
zerver.lib.actions.* when you start `manage.py shell`, which should
save a bit of time basically every time someone uses it.
Fixes#275.
A common issue when doing a Zulip upgrade is trying to pass
upgrade-zulip a tarball path under /root, which doesn't work because
the Zulip user doesn't have permission to read the tarball. We
could fix this by just unpacking the tarballs as root, but it seemed
like a nicer approach would be to archive the release tarballs
somewhere readable by the Zulip user (/home/zulip/archives) and unpack
them from there.
Fixes#208.
The point of the lock is to prevent two deployments happening at the
same time and racing with each other, not to prevent doing any future
deployments after an error happens (which is what the current
implementation does in practice).
Addresses part of #208.
The #! line processing interpreted the argument to pass to `env` as
"python2.7 -u", which obviously isn't a real program.
We fix this by setting the PYTHONUNBUFFERED environment variable
inside the program, which has the same effect.
Thanks to Dan Fedele for the bug report and suggested solution!
With this change, we are now testing the production static asset
pipeline and installation process in a new testing job (and also run
the frontend/backend tests separately).
This means that changes that break the Zulip static asset pipeline or
production installation process are more likely to fail tests. The
testing is imperfect in that it does not have proper isolation -- we
build a complete Zulip development environment and then install a
Zulip production environment on top of it, so e.g. any apt
dependencies installed for Zulip development will still be available
for the Zulip production environment. But, it's better than nothing!
A good v2 of this would be to have the production setup process just
install the minimum stuff needed to run `build-release-tarball` and
then uninstall it / clean it up so that we can do a more clear
production installation, but that's more work.
While the docu on https://www.zulip.org/server.html says:
```
cd /root/zulip
./scripts/setup/install
```
This script downloads the `python-django-guardian_1.3-1~zulip4_all.deb` file to current working dir (`/root/zulip` if you follow the docu), but tries to install it from /root/.
This fails obviously. So i changed the download location to /tmp/.
We don't use apache in the main app -- only for the SSO situation --
this code was just copied from our own install script. And it caused
problems at CUSTOMER13 because they installed Apache in preparation for
the SSO integration, but restarting it failed.
(imported from commit 3f2961574134847c836e8b69736f60d9f8790201)
Eklavya Sharma
Tim Abbott
Vladislav Manchev
Steven Oud
Andreas Litt
Tim Abbott
David Roe
Jonathan Dahan
Luke Faraone
Zev Benjamin
Leo Franchi