Last modified: 2008-04-26 23:27:11 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 10000 - Bogus Diff on page protection
Bogus Diff on page protection
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 9533
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
History/Diffs (Other open bugs)
All All
: Normal normal with 3 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2007-05-22 10:36 UTC by bdk
Modified: 2008-04-26 23:27 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

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


Description bdk 2007-05-22 10:36:31 UTC
Please have a look at the given URL. 

Page protection should result in a null diff, not in that what shows up there. 

Note: The version itself (edit mode) is still correct and shows no difference to the one before. 
See also the following "normal" diff
Comment 1 Rob Church 2007-06-05 13:37:00 UTC
I don't see the bug...?

Protection entries in page histories use a null revision, which points to the text record of the previous sequential revision for that page; the diff shows up fine, that is, it reflects no changes, because the two text records are identical.
Comment 2 Aaron Schulz 2007-06-05 13:43:54 UTC
I think he was referring to

I know that the protection diff was fucked up the last time I checked this. Must have been a cache error.
Comment 3 bdk 2007-06-11 09:25:04 UTC
Note: the diff I gave above showed up as the protection edit by FritzG, but with some additional lines that did not at all belong to this article. This was the case for all people who tried it even more one week after I reported the bug. As this link now shows up as my test edit, it was perhaps related to disordered revision numbers. 

Anyway, it seems to have been a cache issue in fact. Closing as WFM therefore now.
Comment 4 Aaron Schulz 2007-06-11 19:01:18 UTC
Re-opened, the underlying issue is still there nevertheless.
Comment 5 Brion Vibber 2008-04-26 23:27:11 UTC
Assuming this was bogus diff problem (bug 9533), duping.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 9533 ***

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