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
RFCs having errata are not marked approprietly in document lists #2997
Comments
@valery@smyslov.net uploaded file |
@henrik@levkowetz.com commented I think I remember that the reason the errata link isn't shown now was Since then, more comprehensive errata information is available through If the errata information is made part of the ietf.doc.models.Document, Maybe we should also distinguish between Editorial and Technical errata? |
@henrik@levkowetz.com commented I looked at your suggested fix, and it could be that everything else has been updated to use the verified errata information, and the use of |
@rjsparks@nostrum.com changed status from |
@valery@smyslov.net changed status from |
@valery@smyslov.net changed resolution from `` to |
@valery@smyslov.net commented I've made some distinctive displaying of verified vs reported/rejected errata: the former are displayed in red while the latter are displayed in orange. I don't know whether it's OK, but it seems that this distinction helps visually identify more serious cases. |
resolution_fixed
type_defect
| by valery@smyslov.netIn the past whenever a list of documents was displayed in the datatracker,
the RFCs with existing errata were marked with a red "Errata" sign.
Somehow this functionality got lost (at least from 6.110.0 or even before),
so now this sign never appears, even for RFCs with errata (see the attached picture, RFC6311 does have errata).
I checked the datatracker sources and it seems that all the code to display
this sign is it place, so it's a result of a bug and not of a deliberate
decision to remove this sign.
It seems to me that the bug is at the line 122 of ietf/doc/utils_search.py.
As far as I understand in this line id__in should be used instead of name__in
(at least when I made this change in my local copy "Errata" sign
appears properly.
Issue migrated from trac:2997 at 2022-03-04 07:52:14 +0000
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: