Last modified: 2012-08-04 21:10:44 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T39414, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 37414 - Add JavaScript checks so that AFT5 is only displayed for our small test sample
Add JavaScript checks so that AFT5 is only displayed for our small test sample
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
ArticleFeedbackv5 (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Highest critical (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Reha Sterbin
:
Depends on:
Blocks: 39043
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2012-06-08 19:00 UTC by Fabrice Florin
Modified: 2012-08-04 21:10 UTC (History)
0 users

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


Attachments

Description Fabrice Florin 2012-06-08 19:00:38 UTC
Add JavaScript checks in AFT5 Feedback Forms to make sure that AFT5 is only displayed for articles that are in the categories for our small test sample.

In the past few days following launch of the Option 6 feedback form, we had lots of complaints that AFT was appearing in lots of other pages, and Dario reports that we generated a lot more traffic (a third of all AFT4), which is a pretty serious issue. Also, there were so many calls to one of our APIs that we had to shut it down.

It appears that the new JS for Option 6 didn't check categories and that old HTML from cache (which loads ext.articleFeedbackv5.startup unconditionally) caused this to happen. 

So probably the best approach is to duplicate the check in JS for now until the cached HTML goes away, which could take another 30 days.

This commit from Reha puts the js check back:  
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/10696/

One more question: should we change the name of the JS file, so that it would force people to reload that JS, rather than still use the old JS?

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


Navigation
Links