Last modified: 2013-03-14 16:11:12 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 T48120, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 46120 - The props revision return rvcontinue even if the total of revision is reached
The props revision return rvcontinue even if the total of revision is reached
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
API (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Unprioritized normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2013-03-14 15:22 UTC by Xavier Combelle
Modified: 2013-03-14 16:11 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

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


Attachments

Comment 1 Xavier Combelle 2013-03-14 15:28:32 UTC
according to https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_MediaWiki:Gadget-LiveRC.js#R.C3.A9vocation_avec_LiveRC the bug is present in fr.wikipedia since  march 13th 2013 evening
Comment 2 Brad Jorsch 2013-03-14 15:39:46 UTC
There are more than the requested 10 revisions, so it returns rvcontinue to allow you to access them in a subsequent query. If you don't want these additional revisions, you need not make the subsequent query.

This is how it is *supposed* to work, there is no bug here. And this hasn't changed in a very long time.


Your linked discussion seems to be describing something else completely: your code was assuming that the first node named "revisions" was what would be returned by the XPath query "/api/query/pages/page[1]/revisions", while it was actually "/api/query-continue/revisions".

You really should be using the JSON output format from JavaScript, and if you insist on using XML you need to traverse the DOM correctly instead of ripping out a random node and hoping it's the right one.
Comment 3 Xavier Combelle 2013-03-14 16:11:12 UTC
Thanks

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


Navigation
Links