Custom field calls need the tcaseversion_id and not the version number

[roel0]

Example is wrong:
Custom field calls need the tcversion_id and not the version number (line 235)

(as a plus, my vim configuration removed unwanted spaces)

[lczub]

Hello Roel,

I'm sorry, but your suggestion produces tracebacks in my environment:

• TL php server 1.9.16 + TL python client 0.6.4

I changed following for the test in TestLinkExample_CF_KW.py

args =  {...
         'tcversion_number' : lastResult['tcversion_number'],
         'tcversion_id' : lastResult['tcversion_id'],
...
# get CustomField Value - TestCase Execution - using tcversion_number
response = myTestLink.getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue(
                'cf_tc_ex_string', args['testprojectid'], args['tcversion_number'],
                args['executionid'] , args['testplanid'] )
print( "getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue tcversion_number", response )

# get CustomField Value - TestCase Execution - using tcversion_id
response = myTestLink.getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue(
                'cf_tc_ex_string', args['testprojectid'], args['tcversion_id'],
                args['executionid'] , args['testplanid'] )
print( "getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue tcversion_id", response )

results are

getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue tcversion_number {'id': '53', 'name': 'cf_tc_ex_string', 'label': 'CF Exec String', 'type': '0', 'possible_values': '', 'default_value': '', 'valid_regexp': '', 'length_min': '0', 'length_max': '0', 'show_on_design': '0', 'enable_on_design': '0', 'show_on_execution': '1', 'enable_on_execution': '1', 'show_on_testplan_design': '0', 'enable_on_testplan_design': '0', 'display_order': '1', 'location': '1', 'required': '0', 'value': 'a custom exec value set via api', 'node_id': '15230'}

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "D:\git\TestLink-API-Python-client\example\TestLinkExample_CF_KW.py", line 254, in <module>
    args['executionid'] , args['testplanid'] )
  File "D:\git\TestLink-API-Python-client\src\testlink\testlinkdecorators.py", line 140, in wrapperReplaceTLResponseError
    response = methodAPI(self, *argsPositional, **argsOptional)
  File "D:\git\TestLink-API-Python-client\src\testlink\testlinkdecorators.py", line 112, in wrapperAddDevKey
    return methodAPI(self, *argsPositional, **argsOptional)
  File "D:\git\TestLink-API-Python-client\src\testlink\testlinkdecorators.py", line 100, in wrapperWithArgs
    *argsPositional, **argsOptional)
  File "D:\git\TestLink-API-Python-client\src\testlink\testlinkapigeneric.py", line 1515, in callServerWithPosArgs
    self._checkResponse(response, methodNameAPI, argsOptional) 
  File "D:\git\TestLink-API-Python-client\src\testlink\testlinkapigeneric.py", line 1879, in _checkResponse
    response[0]['message'], response[0]['code'])
testlink.testlinkerrors.TLResponseError: 236: No match between following parameters (version/executionid)
getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue({'devKey': '94cc922ff3a62291a7cb9c4adbb60501', 'customfieldname': 'cf_tc_ex_string', 'testprojectid': '15215', 'version': '15230', 'executionid': '2080', 'testplanid': '15216'})

So for my environment, using the tc version number works, using the the tc version id not.

If you take a look into the TL php code xmlrpc.class.php - getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue, you find the sql statement

      $sql = " SELECT id,tcversion_id FROM {$this->tables['executions']} " .
             " WHERE id = " . intval($args[self::$executionIDParamName]) .
             " AND tcversion_number = " . 
             intval($args[self::$versionNumberParamName]);

which shows, that the TL php server really requires the version number as input.

To understand your failure situation, it would be helpful, if you can send the original failure messages before (without) your code changes (and maybe also the logs for the TestLinkExample.py plus TestLinkExample_CF_KW.py examples ).

Regards Luiko

[roel0]

Hi,

Weird. I'm using testlink 1.9.13.

As requested:

print tls.getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue("TP_LinkedArtifact",                                                                     
                                                project_id,
                                                latest['tcversion_id'],
                                                latest['id'],
                                                latest['testplan_id'])

Results in:
{'default_value': '', 'enable_on_execution': '1', 'name': 'TP_LinkedArtifact', 'location': '1', 'enable_on_design': '0', 'valid_regexp': '', 'length_min': '0', 'possible_values': '', **'value': '888**', 'label': 'Linked to artifact number', 'show_on_testplan_design': '0', 'display_order': '1', 'length_max': '0', 'show_on_design': '0', 'required': '0', 'show_on_execution': '1', 'type': '1', 'id': '8', 'node_id': '35502', 'enable_on_testplan_design': '0'}

and

print tls.getTestCaseCustomFieldExecutionValue("TP_LinkedArtifact",                                                                     
                                                project_id,
                                                latest['tcversion_number'],
                                                latest['id'],
                                                latest['testplan_id'])

results in
{'default_value': '', 'enable_on_execution': '1', 'name': 'TP_LinkedArtifact', 'location': '1', 'enable_on_design': '0', 'valid_regexp': '', 'length_min': '0', 'possible_values': '', 'value': '', 'label': 'Linked to artifact number', 'show_on_testplan_design': '0', 'display_order': '1', 'length_max': '0', 'show_on_design': '0', 'required': '0', 'show_on_execution': '1', 'type': '1', 'id': '8', 'node_id': '', 'enable_on_testplan_design': '0'}

So both calls work for me, only the one as described in the your example results in an empty value field.
It might be that it was somehow a bug or something because I'm using an older version of testlink.

[roel0]

It's indeed a bug on testlink API itself, which has been resolved in the latest version:
http://mantis.testlink.org/view.php?id=7202

[lczub]

Hello Roel,

good to here, that you find the reason for this failure.
Thanks for the analysis.

Cheers Luiko