https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14261

Marcin Cieślak <marcin.cies...@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
                 CC|                            |marcin.cies...@gmail.com
         Depends on|                            |22226
         Resolution|WORKSFORME                  |

--- Comment #7 from Marcin Cieślak <marcin.cies...@gmail.com> 2010-01-22 
02:38:34 UTC ---
One example of extension that fails with API edit for me is AntiBot (pretty
generic MediaWiki installation, now at r61343). I have described this under bug
22226. In this case I was lucky enough I could enable debug log and trace the
problem down.

There are, however, some reports like this pywikipedia bug
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2892593&group_id=93107&atid=603138
where it is difficult for the requester to track down the problem; as this
concerns a Wikimedia wiki.

Maybe wfRunHooks could report names of extensions that fail? Or maybe hooks
(and their documentation!) should be re-engineered to provide clear indication
whether they are being called on API or during interactive use? 

For example EditFilter/EditFilter hooks provide a whole EditPage instance, that
- in case of API edit - may be different than the typical object instance.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to