Last modified: 2011-10-28 17:23:56 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 T33991, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 31991 - Navigation through revision history of pages with imported revisions is confusing
Navigation through revision history of pages with imported revisions is confu...
Status: NEW
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
History/Diffs (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Normal normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2011-10-27 15:23 UTC by Helder
Modified: 2011-10-28 17:23 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

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


Attachments

Description Helder 2011-10-27 15:23:30 UTC
From IRC:

Go to https://pt.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Predefini%C3%A7%C3%A3o:0&action=history&uselang=en
and click to see the diff of the most recent edit, which will be https://pt.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?diff=227984&oldid=216252&uselang=en

Do you know if it is normal not to have links to previous versions ?

Compare e.g. to https://pt.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?diff=216252&oldid=227983&uselang=en
(wich is the diff between the previous two edits in the history)

Is that the expected behaviour when a revision is imported from a file as was made by Reedy?

Besides,
https://pt.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Predefinição:0&diff=next&oldid=216252&uselang=en
has no back link

and it is a revision from "10 March 2006" which the user gets when clicking on newer revision on the revision from "27 March 2011".

I think this navigation through the history should be consistent with what is shown on "action=history", in chronological order.
Comment 1 Mark A. Hershberger 2011-10-28 17:20:27 UTC
I imagine it has been like this for a while, but I don't really know.
Comment 2 Aaron Schulz 2011-10-28 17:23:56 UTC
The links assume rev_id is in chronological rev_timestamp order...which it isn't. They should be using rev_timestamp queries.

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


Navigation
Links