Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

'facet.limit' in package_search wrongly handled #1237

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 15, 2013

Conversation

amercader
Copy link
Member

The search params schema does not support negative values, but Solr supports it. Poor docs and no tests.

A negative value should be allowed if you don't want to limit the facet
values, but the search params schema didn't allow it. Also mention in
the docs that this can be set via configuration and that the default is
50. Added some tests.
@ghost ghost assigned nigelbabu Sep 19, 2013
@@ -1289,8 +1289,9 @@ def package_search(context, data_dict):
:param facet.mincount: the minimum counts for facet fields should be
included in the results.
:type facet.mincount: int
:param facet.limit: the maximum number of constraint counts that should be
returned for the facet fields. A negative value means unlimited
:param facet.limit: the maximum number of values the facet fields. A
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I feel like this sentence is incomplete. Should it be the maximum number of values the facet fields returns?

@nigelbabu
Copy link
Contributor

@amercader Other than the small nit for the docstring, it seems to be okay.

@nigelbabu
Copy link
Contributor

@amercader ping?

@amercader
Copy link
Member Author

@nigelbabu fixed

nigelbabu added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2013
'facet.limit' in package_search wrongly handled
@nigelbabu nigelbabu merged commit e6d2c45 into master Oct 15, 2013
@nigelbabu nigelbabu deleted the 1237-facet.limit_improvements branch October 15, 2013 04:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants