Last modified: 2009-08-07 04:06:16 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 20072 - cmnamespace in API categorymembers does not work on Wikimedia wikis
cmnamespace in API categorymembers does not work on Wikimedia wikis
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 19640
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
API (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Normal normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Roan Kattouw
http://vi.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?act...
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-08-05 04:12 UTC by Tran Vinh Tan
Modified: 2009-08-07 04:06 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Tran Vinh Tan 2009-08-05 04:12:45 UTC
Although I set cmnamespace=6 (File namespace), the result still add "Category" namespace (10) and "Template" namespace. I suggested it is a bug in API.

It makes my bot delete some unwanted pages :(.
Comment 1 Splarka 2009-08-05 05:29:52 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 19640 ***
Comment 2 Brad Jorsch 2009-08-05 13:19:51 UTC
Reopening and changing product to Wikimedia, so it has a somewhat better chance of showing up in bug searches. A workable (if not optimal) fix has been in MediaWiki for weeks, but no one has bothered to use it to fix the completely-broken live hack on Wikimedia wikis (and a scap doesn't seem particularly forthcoming).
Comment 3 Raimond Spekking 2009-08-05 13:27:11 UTC
A dupe is a dupe is a dupe. Closing again.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 19640 ***
Comment 4 Brad Jorsch 2009-08-05 16:48:55 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> A dupe is a dupe is a dupe. Closing again.

Good to know that "A live hack broke Wikipedia, and despite it being fixed in MediaWiki it still isn't fixed on Wikipedia" isn't a bug you care about.
Comment 5 Splarka 2009-08-06 05:03:44 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Good to know that "A live hack broke Wikipedia, and despite it being fixed in
> MediaWiki it still isn't fixed on Wikipedia" isn't a bug you care about.

The "Live Hack" disabling the feature was applied to MediaWiki, and deployed to Wikimedia after, and was then later fixed in MediaWiki more properly, but this later fix is not YET deployed to Wikimedia. This happens sometimes. The disabling was immediately deployed because it was causing server lag. The fix eventually /will/ get deployed to Wikimedia, during the next code review and scap. This is not considered urgent as it isn't causing server problems. There are thousands of changes between scaps, the few server administrators available can't immediately deploy any of them except the urgent ones.

And... Wikimedia's Bugzilla policy is to mark MediaWiki bugs as fixed when they are fixed in trunk, not when they are deployed Wikimedia. This is and was a MediaWiki bug (introduced in, and corrected in), not a Wikimedia issue. The Wikimedia issue will sort itself out in a few days/weeks.
Comment 6 Brad Jorsch 2009-08-06 16:02:51 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> This is not considered urgent as it isn't causing server problems.

Just client problems. For almost a month, with no end in sight.

> And... Wikimedia's Bugzilla policy is to mark MediaWiki bugs as fixed when they
> are fixed in trunk, not when they are deployed Wikimedia. This is and was a
> MediaWiki bug (introduced in, and corrected in), not a Wikimedia issue.

So just because the live hack was put in trunk before being applied to Wikimedia, it's not a Wikimedia issue? Fun. It would be different if the bug was due to something that went through code review and was normally scapped.
Comment 7 Platonides 2009-08-06 16:10:01 UTC
Wasn't the fix on today's scap?
Comment 8 Splarka 2009-08-07 04:06:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> Fun. It would be different if the bug was due to something that went 
> through code review and was normally scapped.

No it wouldn't. It would be corrected in trunk and would go live at the next scap. It has happened exactly this way for thousands of bugs already.



Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links