I just did an install of Bugzilla from scratch, following the instructions, and found the following docs problems (all of which can probably be fixed in one patch, hence the one bug). - 2.1.5: The "do not run it again" warning is now redundant as we use --check-modules. - 2.1.6: Is it still true that Bugzilla requires an MTA to be available? I didn't think it was. - 2.2.1: You need to add a note that it's often necessary to change the name of the webserver user. On Debian or Ubuntu, the Apache user is called "www-data". - 2.2.4.3: The AOL Server section is very old indeed (note the reference to syncshadowdb) and should probably be removed. - 2.2.5: This should note that the URL used may well have a /bugzilla/ or similar if you symlinked into your wwwroot. Might it be a good idea for a fresh install, following the instructions, to be one of the pre-release QA tests? Gerv

Colin asked me to take this. I guess he forgot to reassign it 8-)

Patch to address the concerns from comment 0: > - 2.1.5: The "do not run it again" warning is now redundant as we use > --check-modules. Updated. > - 2.1.6: Is it still true that Bugzilla requires an MTA to be available? I > didn't think it was. Not really. However, if a change here is made incorrectly then people may think that Bugzilla can provide its own internal MTA. I have added a note after paragraph 1, and added the maildeliverymethod parameter to the list in section 3.1. I also re-wrapped the entire section, since it was needed. > - 2.2.1: You need to add a note that it's often necessary to change the name > of the webserver user. On Debian or Ubuntu, the Apache user is called > "www-data". Agreed. I'm also going to note that shared hosting users, or people who can not become root on the server they use, may need to leave the field blank, even though they will get a warning every time they run checksetup.pl. > - 2.2.4.3: The AOL Server section is very old indeed (note the reference to > syncshadowdb) and should probably be removed. Sure 8-) > - 2.2.5: This should note that the URL used may well have a /bugzilla/ or > similar if you symlinked into your wwwroot. OK I actually developed this on tip, but it also looks OK in 2.20.

Comment on attachment 201694 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v1 >+ <para> >+ On Linux, any Sendmail-compatible MTA (Mail Transfer Agent) will >+ suffice. Sendmail, Postfix, qmail and Exim are examples of common >+ MTAs. Sendmail is the original Unix MTA, but the others are easier to >+ configure, and therefore many people replace Sendmail with Postfix or >+ Exim. They are drop-in replacements, so that Bugzilla will not >+ distinguish between them. >+ </para> I'm not 100% sure that the last 'that' should be there, but I know it was there originally... I am not giving it r+ until I've tested it... but I think it looks OK. I'll try and test it tomorrow. Thanks Karl.

(In reply to comment #3) > (From update of attachment 201694 [details] [diff] [review] [edit]) > >+ <para> > >+ On Linux, any Sendmail-compatible MTA (Mail Transfer Agent) will > >+ suffice. Sendmail, Postfix, qmail and Exim are examples of common > >+ MTAs. Sendmail is the original Unix MTA, but the others are easier to > >+ configure, and therefore many people replace Sendmail with Postfix or > >+ Exim. They are drop-in replacements, so that Bugzilla will not > >+ distinguish between them. > >+ </para> > > I'm not 100% sure that the last 'that' should be there, but I know it was > there originally... If requested, I could easily make this change at checkin... > I am not giving it r+ until I've tested it... but I think it looks OK. I'll > try and test it tomorrow. ... or, if you have not yet finished testing, I can make the change now.

(In reply to comment #4) > > I am not giving it r+ until I've tested it... but I think it looks OK. I'll > > try and test it tomorrow. > > ... or, if you have not yet finished testing, I can make the change now. That thing called Life got in the way :( I should have time in the next day or so to do it.

Comment on attachment 201694 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v1 Still not sure on the 'that' as previously mentioned, but this compiles and looks right to me

This is the exact patch to be checked in to tip and 2.20.

tip: Checking in docs/xml/administration.xml; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/administration.xml,v <-- administration.xml new revision: 1.54; previous revision: 1.53 done Checking in docs/xml/installation.xml; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v <-- installation.xml new revision: 1.104; previous revision: 1.103 done 2.20: Checking in docs/xml/administration.xml; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/administration.xml,v <-- administration.xml new revision: 1.50.2.2; previous revision: 1.50.2.1 done Checking in docs/xml/installation.xml; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v <-- installation.xml new revision: 1.98.2.6; previous revision: 1.98.2.5 done