HTTPS links in Redmine email

We’ve been shifting a few things around in our infrastructure, and one of them was the Redmine server.   Getting it up and running on a custom port using https is all pretty straightforward, but when the email notifications on issues started going out to watchers, they all had http://hostname:port/.… in them.   The problem was it was an https server.

Pulling the default swiss-army-problem-solver of searching the web out, it’s in the Redmine FAQ as well as a number of posted solutions.   Apache isn’t passing through the protocol.   So you add in a magic little Apache line for RequestHeader on forwarding the protocol as https and….

It doesn’t work.   

Then into some hairy mod_rewrite.   Firewall configs cause that to turn into a serious conflagration.   What to do, what to do.

Oh look, there’s a setting IN REDMINE on the general page, just under your host name with custom port if you have one of “http” or “https”.

Set that to https, problem solved.

Now trying to get that into the Redmine documentation as an outsider is a whole other adventure, so in the mean time at least it will be here in the swiss-army-problem-solver of the internet, and if you’re specific enough, you got here with a good ol’ search through   Or if you got here through a filter-bubble of a more popular search engine, well heck, I guess my page rank went way up now didn’t it?   🙂

Happy configuring.

Things are moved, and we are underway!

Apologies for the deluge of reposts as I moved everything over.   The original post dates are in the titles of each should you be interested, and things are backed up and configured as needed at last.

So after a few years of being largely idle, Digital Katana Technologies Ltd. is underway and operating.   Currently we are doing work both with software development and coding as well as architecture and technology consulting.   The the midst of that, some time is finally being allocated to work more consistently on the iOS apps Digital Katana has been designing and exploring over the past year.

The blog posts on technology will start to flow and anytime a software release or other company news comes about, the news will be published here first.


One platform, two, three, more? – Original Post November 24, 2010

James Governor over at Red Monk (a great bunch of analysts I alternately seem to agree with and take issue with) posted a take on the mobile platform development continuum and HTML5 as an alternative. Take a read and the disagreement I voice below will have a better context.   I’m reposting the reply here because it is a relevant discussion and I leave him the right to do with his site as he will, and that includes having it go away.   So I’ll keep my work where I can get at it.   On my laptop in MarsEdit and on the web on my own blog as well.   🙂

[I feel] James, [is] getting a bit absolutist for an analyst that usually sees how things fit together more completely.   It’s not a winner-take-all end game.   Some apps work better on a local platform, native toolchain, optimized into the hardware, fixed system, no browser barrier.   Usually have a higher development cost than the average web app.   These are, of course, generalizations.

Just look at the Samsung Galaxy response.   Some people like it.   Different form factor.   Different purpose.   iPad app onto a Galaxy?   Most wouldn’t feel right or be a great experience.   The web gives you a “common denominator” approach, and that usually gets offset by a pile of javascript conditionals adjusting for the nuances of browsers.

I tell you, trying to use a mutual fund screening system on the web today was horribly painful.   The state and ability to pull things in and out of a spreadsheet app is just not happening.   The app is older and could be improved with some newer approached and technology, but really, I want my <em>data</em> to be able to flow back and forth securely between devices, but when I’m working, I want it to be <em>here</em>.   That’s why the browsers keep adding in desktop features.   Because the experience in the browser is and has been inferior.

WebGL?  Offline Storage?  Hardware graphics acceleration?   Codec hardware acceleration?   These are all desktop features that get pulled into the browser over time as it trails behind.   It’s not surprising, and it’s not going to change.  Standards move slower than most proprietary innovation.  Web apps are usually for a cheaper and/or broader approach, with a radically different revenue model.

It just baffles me that development gets lumped into a bucket of “proprietary platform” or “web standards”.  Both are two ends of a continuum.   OpenGL is pretty cross-platform in the bulk of the API.   And it’s well defined on experience.   There’s shades of gray all over.   Are you telling me the same technology and approach for Farmville is appropriate for Doom3 or Call of Duty Black Ops?   I don’t hear the game companies complaining about supporting 5 or 6 platforms, let alone 2 or 3.

Of course, the desktop pulled in automatic updates and notfications and sync from the web in many ways to bring those strengths across too, so it’s not totally a one-way street.

But it’s not a one-lane street either.


The Apple Design Awards – Original post April 29, 2010

This is a weird one. Apple finally (and rather late really) announced the WWDC 2010 dates and such. And dropped a bit of a shocker on the long-standing Mac developer community.

The Apple Design Awards, long coveted as awards recognizing some of the best in design, performance and functionality on the Mac, and recently on the iPhone OS (including iPod) this year are only accepting iPhone OS apps and iPad apps. ADAs for apps that haven’t even been shipping a full quarter? And NONE for the Mac. You can’t nominate anything that doesn’t have an app store URL.

This really seems a callous slap in the face of Mac developers. Somebody has to make the Mac good for more than just developing iPhone apps, and these guys do it. But that seems to have been lost on Apple this year.

Looking at the session overview though, I have a theory of sorts on this and what’s coming up.

The sessions are VERY heavy on iPhone OS, mostly iPhone OS 4. There are Mac streams as well, but really mostly specialized streams. There’s also no IT stream listed this year. That’s another big break from last year.

No, I don’t think Apple is bailing on the Mac platform, and no I don’t think they are going to kill off development on it or on the server OS. What I do think is they wound up with a year of heavy focus on iPhone and the iPad, and that actually drained their engineers away a lot from the rest of the work. Let’s face it, they put a pile of effort into Snow Leopard in the guts, with OpenCL, the LLVM stack, GCD, and an acre of other bits. This year it’s iPhone OS 4 that looks like it’s really chewing up a lot of time, plus they need to get the iPad onto that release as well (I’ll bet that’s to be announced at WWDC this year).

So I’m going to predict that 10.7 is not coming on the usual release cycle. I think we’re looking at WWDC 2011 will be a resurgence on the Mac side as it will likely be an off-year for iPhone OS in many ways as they enhance 4.0 and start thinking about 5.0. WWDC 2011 will preview 10.7 that will have some of the iPhone OS showing up in the touch interface capabilities, possibly with some new hardward in the iMac line with touch screens in the fall, and 10.7 released with those. The level of quality that Apple usually churns out I think has actually stretched them on this one, and they can’t keep 3.5 product lines cranking, being the Mac, iPhone, iPad and the 0.5 of the iPod being an adjusted iPhone. So they wind up with sort of an iPhone/iPad/iPod year of WWDC with a minor Mac focus, then (hopefully) a major Mac focus with a minor mobile, or even more ideally for both groups (though expensive for those with feet in both ponds) they split to have a mobile WWDC and a Mac WWDC.

Then the ADAs could have mobile ADAs and Mac ADAs. And all would be a bit more balanced again in the universe. Maybe even the odd Universal ADA for software like OmniFocus that spans all of them. If all the platform implementations are good enough.

Apple store review… no details? – Original Post November 11, 2009

This seems to be getting a lot of play today: Facebook iPhone app developer hands it off and goes on to other projects: At TechCrunch

The thing that seems to be completely missing is what he finds so objectionable. There’s a quick jab that he’s opposed to the very existence of the review process. So it’s political/philosophical? I suppose his work at Facebook and how it reflects on that company isn’t reviewed by anyone and he’s totally free and unfettered to produce the good, the bad and the ugly as he sees fit?

There’s a lot of things wrong with Apple’s review process, but compared to my experience with Palm and Blackberry, there’s a whole lot less crap coming out on the platform in comparison. I can’t prove that’s credit to the app store, but I suspect there’s a chunk of credit due there. There’s a lot of issues with it as well in rejections from Apple on overlapping or confusing interface and conflict with built-in applications. I think the difference is that Apple is trying, and succeeding to varying degrees, to provide a more consistent level of experience with the platform. That’s bringing a lot of pros and cons to what we can and can’t do as developers on the platform, and there is a big obfuscated review system inbetween the devs and the customers. It’s different, and it’s far from perfect, but I think there’s benefits there worth pursuing and working to improve with Apple.

Now, if you could put together competing app stores, that would be quite interesting as well. I wouldn’t mind some competition on that side. On the opposing view, the worm that’s trashing up iPhones in Australia is on jailbroken iPhones running applications put out by devs that are very competent, but they aren’t reviewed and they aren’t within the confines of Apple’s restrictions and systems. I think that’s an indicator that there is some end-user benefit to the way Apple is doing this. And keep in mind, as developers, that’s who we are here for. The Users. Not ourselves and our own political agendas.

I really like the Facebook iPhone app. Would have shelled a few bucks out for it was it a paid-for app. I’m sorry to see a talented programmer bail on the platform over Apple’s policies, but he has every right to do so and make his opinion heard. I just wish it had a bit more meat on it than being opposed to “the very existence of the review process”.

I’m sure that more platforms will put in review processes actually based on the success of Apple, but others will not. The users will decide with their wallets which one contributes to a more desirable product and platform. I’m pretty sure we’ll have both models for a long time to come.

Let’s Kill the OS Upgrade Disc – Sure, but with a SUBSCRIPTION? – Original Post November 11, 2009

Let’s Kill the OS Upgrade Disc – CBS News: “

Not having an upgrade disc is what the Mac OS X series has had from the start. Even Snow Leopard is that way despite the fact you are supposed to be on Leopard to pay the upgrade reduced price rather than full box set price. Snow Leopard is a bit of an outlier at any rate.

But this guy is saying just put in a subscription. Apparently he didn’t hear the corporations that paid just such a subscription to Microsoft and got nothing for it screaming for blood a few years back. And again was not listening too closely when that fee gave them Vista and broke rather sizeable chunks of their software and IT processes.

No way. If Mac offered a subscription for OS upgrades, even then I would say only maybe because sometimes old software you need breaks and you can’t upgrade until it’s ready to go. And until it’s ready, I’ll keep my money. With Windows, it seems you pay to break the majority of your software for home users, being games and fun bits that aren’t always written so well or on enduring APIs.

Applications, on the other hand, I’m all for his approach. In-app upgrades, fully downloadable. Of course, most of the solid apps do that already. At least on the Mac. Sorry, but I’m still amused at the catch-up. People seem to think the Mac is fan boy base and not capability. I got onto this platform after running Windows, Unix and Linux as my primaries for many years. I went to it because it works, and it’s higher quality. Losing some software options was outweighed by having this sort of capability and maturity already there for the past half decade. And it keeps getting better. I’m not turning the clock back. It’s just good to see another platform, especially the dominant one, trying to at least start to move forward at last.

Now about that WinFS thing…….. 😉

How do you upgrade and lose your compatibility? Windows 7 Home premium. – original post November 10, 2009

I’m at a loss on this one. I run XP (fully licensed) on my Parallels machine on my Mac. Usually to test the worlds worst browser family of IE, but occasionally to run a few dev environments for microcontrollers (ColdFire) that don’t like mac, and are a pain to install on Linux.

So, I’d like to get and stay familiar with Windows once in a while, and I figured, let’s look at 7 as it sounds like it’s not the complete loss Vista was. There’s even some decent reviews lurking about on it.

To upgrade my XP to Windows 7, I can’t just upgrade to “Home Premium” from XP, or I lose the XP productivity compatibility mode…. which I think is XP compatibility but it’s not like Microsoft bothered to write up a “what is this” page on that little line item feature. I need to upgrade to professional or ultimate. Just for being able to work with an OS that I’m upgrading from. Huh?

Then I look at the prices, and to get the stuff that the Mac OS X has come with for a couple of versions now (you choose the language to work in or multiple languages, file, directory and disk encryption built-in, automatic backup, create local networks easily and quickly, work with the previous version of OS ( or in Macs case anything since about 10.2 usually still works, althouth the powerPC binaries are starting to fall away), I wind up paying about $300 for the priviledge. I think I’ve usually paid $119 for a single Mac OS X copy, or $179 for a family pack (5 computers in a household).

Sorry, but the value as a primary OS simply isn’t there in comparison, and as an occasional OS for keeping my toe in Windows, it most CERTAINLY isn’t there.

It’s cheaper to buy a fricking PC with a license on it and then sell the PC without an OS on it, but that’s probably against some obscure terms and conditions of the license agreement.

They keep bragging about how Windows 7 is trouncing the Vista early adopter numbers. It’s not hard to beat single digits, especially when you’re killed support on the last decent OS you put out 7 years ago.

Easier to buy a PC, clone it into a VM with Parallels and wipe the drive clean and install Linux on the POS. What a ridiculous licensing gong show. You know it costs a small fraction to get it on a new PC, but try to just buy the OS and you’re going to pay dearly for not landfilling another computer.

Windows. Microsoft. Still feels like 1995 to me when I deal with them.

Windows 7 upgrade path – Are you kidding me? Really? – original post August 8, 2009

‘Dumb’ Windows 7 upgrade chart sparks spat

This looks like it will push a few more into Apple’s arms. I mean, who came up with that? Rather than prettying up the desktop and making cooler startup sounds and graphic effects, maybe some care should have been taken around the upgrade and migration process?

One item of note, the “new PC” argument. There’s a big difference there too. Apple has a migration assistant. You put your old machine on the network, plug in the new Mac, and tell it during your setup to migrate over your apps, data, users, etc. Then you head out to a movie for a few hours and let it work.

Last time I did a Windows upgrade (which was thankfully a LONG while ago) there was no such feature. There’s a few enterprise tools in the Microsoft regime, but that’s for those wacky system administrators to deal with. There’s even (as usual) a third-party tool or two to help you for an added fee.

I just don’t get why the team at Redmond continues to treat their users with utter contempt, thinking that a computer user in the 21st century is going to putter around and fiddling with things like they did in the 80s and 90s. People who use computers now are not technology enthusiasts. They are not tinkerers from the dawn of personal computing. They are not a developer or computer professional. It’s our job as developers to help them out, not create a “clean install” full-day attended experience followed by reinstalling all the software onto the computer from original installation files rather than copying them across and (maybe) re-entering the license key.

I’ll chalk it up to (another) part of the Windows Experience I don’t miss in the least. I’ve got a lot of other things to do with a day of time. Fortunately, when Snow Leopard ships this fall, the computer will do the bulk of the work and let me go do those things with my kids.

Sorry, what was that 2B for again???? – original post August 2, 2009

So, in the realm of value and buyer beware, it seems that eBay might have had some lawyers that didn’t remember to put their reading glasses on. This story over at would imply that 2B was the value (well, 1.7B now after a write-down) of a network minus a central piece of the technology.

Sorry, but if you’re paying that much, you get a perpetual license to it at a reasonable rate adjusted for inflation or valuation or the like. You don’t put that much money on the table and have that sort of escape clause.

Now regardles of what the gents at joltid may or may not have the rights to do, swinging that sort of deal on that much cash, which being possibly legally legit, is a very crooked, fly-by-night way of doing business. Pulling such a license from eBay after taking the money on the deal would put these guys in one of the least trustworthy tiers of businessmen on the planet in my books. That is, essentially, ripping their customer (eBay in this case) off.

I really hope there’s a misunderstanding in here and that this is a rumour or hiccup in the business relationship that got heard and blown out of whack. I hope that both sides are being honourable and honest in the dealings, and fair.

But that lawyer still needs their prescription checked.