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

Calling getCurrentUrl on Store will wrongly add "___store" parameter #18941

Closed
LucaGallinari opened this issue Oct 30, 2018 · 11 comments
Closed
Assignees
Labels
Component: Store Event: mm18nyc Fixed in 2.2.x The issue has been fixed in 2.2 release line Fixed in 2.3.x The issue has been fixed in 2.3 release line Issue: Clear Description Gate 2 Passed. Manual verification of the issue description passed Issue: Confirmed Gate 3 Passed. Manual verification of the issue completed. Issue is confirmed Issue: Format is valid Gate 1 Passed. Automatic verification of issue format passed Issue: Ready for Work Gate 4. Acknowledged. Issue is added to backlog and ready for development Reproduced on 2.2.x The issue has been reproduced on latest 2.2 release Reproduced on 2.3.x The issue has been reproduced on latest 2.3 release

Comments

@LucaGallinari
Copy link

LucaGallinari commented Oct 30, 2018

Summary (*)

I have the config "store code in URL" set to "yes" but when i use the method "getCurrentUrl" on a Store type variable i get the current URL but with the parameter "___store=[code]" in it, if the current store is not the one requested in the URL.
I want to use the getCurrentUrl method in order to redirect the user to the correct store based on some custom logic (like the browser language), but i don't want any additional parameters to be in the URL.
Form what i found out by looking around in the code, the parameter "___store" is mandatory when the config "use store code in URL" is set to "no" but not when it's set to "yes", as in my case. The store code is already in the URL (as set in system config) and it's not necessary to add any other parameters in the URL to remark this.

Examples (*)

<?php

namespace Fonderia\StoreAutoRedirect\Observer;

use Magento\Framework\Event\Observer;
use Magento\Framework\Event\ObserverInterface;
use Magento\Store\Model\Store;
use Magento\Store\Api\StoreRepositoryInterface;

class RedirectObserver implements ObserverInterface
{
    /**
     * @var StoreRepositoryInterface
     */
    private $storeRepository;

    public function __construct(StoreRepositoryInterface $storeRepository) {
        $this->storeRepository = $storeRepository;
    }

    public function execute(Observer $observer)
    {
        $storeCode = '[your store code]';

        /** @var Store $store */
        $store = $this->storeRepository->get($storeCode);
        $url = $store->getCurrentUrl(true);
        // ...
    }
}

Proposed solution

Not a solution but this is what i found out by debugging.

At this line of code you can clearly see that it's applying the right logic. But if you try to debug you'll see that at this point of the code the variable $storeUrl has already the parameter "___store" set in it, because it's in this line that it do this. By going to the getUrl method implementation you'll found out that if the current store is not the one requested in the URL it'll add the "_scope_to_url" param at this line. This flag will eventually cause the problem because it will end up at this line where i think the wrong logic is applied, it's the opposite as the one that i pointed out initially in this section.

@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

magento-engcom-team commented Oct 30, 2018

Hi @LucaGallinari. Thank you for your report.
To help us process this issue please make sure that you provided the following information:

  • Summary of the issue
  • Information on your environment
  • Steps to reproduce
  • Expected and actual results

Please make sure that the issue is reproducible on the vanilla Magento instance following Steps to reproduce. To deploy vanilla Magento instance on our environment, please, add a comment to the issue:

@magento-engcom-team give me $VERSION instance

where $VERSION is version tags (starting from 2.2.0+) or develop branches (for example: 2.3-develop).
For more details, please, review the Magento Contributor Assistant documentation.

@LucaGallinari do you confirm that you was able to reproduce the issue on vanilla Magento instance following steps to reproduce?

  • yes
  • no

@magento-engcom-team magento-engcom-team added the Issue: Format is valid Gate 1 Passed. Automatic verification of issue format passed label Oct 30, 2018
@ghost ghost self-assigned this Oct 30, 2018
@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

magento-engcom-team commented Oct 30, 2018

Hi @engcom-backlog-nazar. Thank you for working on this issue.
In order to make sure that issue has enough information and ready for development, please read and check the following instruction: 👇

  • 1. Verify that issue has all the required information. (Preconditions, Steps to reproduce, Expected result, Actual result).

    DetailsIf the issue has a valid description, the label Issue: Format is valid will be added to the issue automatically. Please, edit issue description if needed, until label Issue: Format is valid appears.

  • 2. Verify that issue has a meaningful description and provides enough information to reproduce the issue. If the report is valid, add Issue: Clear Description label to the issue by yourself.

  • 3. Add Component: XXXXX label(s) to the ticket, indicating the components it may be related to.

  • 4. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch

    Details- Add the comment @magento-engcom-team give me 2.3-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
    - If the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch, please, add the label Reproduced on 2.3.x.
    - If the issue is not reproducible, add your comment that issue is not reproducible and close the issue and stop verification process here!

  • 5. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.2-develop branch.

    Details- Add the comment @magento-engcom-team give me 2.2-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
    - If the issue is reproducible on 2.2-develop branch, please add the label Reproduced on 2.2.x

  • 6. Add label Issue: Confirmed once verification is complete.

  • 7. Make sure that automatic system confirms that report has been added to the backlog.

@ghost ghost added Issue: Clear Description Gate 2 Passed. Manual verification of the issue description passed Component: Store Reproduced on 2.2.x The issue has been reproduced on latest 2.2 release Reproduced on 2.3.x The issue has been reproduced on latest 2.3 release Issue: Confirmed Gate 3 Passed. Manual verification of the issue completed. Issue is confirmed labels Oct 30, 2018
@magento-engcom-team magento-engcom-team added the Issue: Ready for Work Gate 4. Acknowledged. Issue is added to backlog and ready for development label Oct 30, 2018
@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

@engcom-backlog-nazar Thank you for verifying the issue. Based on the provided information internal tickets MAGETWO-95999, MAGETWO-96000 were created

@ghost ghost removed their assignment Oct 30, 2018
@Eudemon
Copy link

Eudemon commented Oct 31, 2018

#mm18nyc please give me access to the issue

@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

@Eudemon thank you for joining. Please accept team invitation here and self-assign the issue.

@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Eudemon. Thank you for working on this issue.
Looks like this issue is already verified and confirmed. But if your want to validate it one more time, please, go though the following instruction:

  • 1. Add/Edit Component: XXXXX label(s) to the ticket, indicating the components it may be related to.

  • 2. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch

    Details- Add the comment @magento-engcom-team give me 2.3-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
    - If the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch, please, add the label Reproduced on 2.3.x.
    - If the issue is not reproducible, add your comment that issue is not reproducible and close the issue and stop verification process here!

  • 3. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.2-develop branch.

    Details- Add the comment @magento-engcom-team give me 2.2-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
    - If the issue is reproducible on 2.2-develop branch, please add the label Reproduced on 2.2.x

  • 4. If the issue is not relevant or is not reproducible any more, feel free to close it.

@Eudemon Eudemon removed their assignment Nov 2, 2018
@Nazar65 Nazar65 self-assigned this Nov 9, 2018
@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Nazar65. Thank you for working on this issue.
Looks like this issue is already verified and confirmed. But if your want to validate it one more time, please, go though the following instruction:

  • 1. Add/Edit Component: XXXXX label(s) to the ticket, indicating the components it may be related to.

  • 2. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch

    Details- Add the comment @magento-engcom-team give me 2.3-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
    - If the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch, please, add the label Reproduced on 2.3.x.
    - If the issue is not reproducible, add your comment that issue is not reproducible and close the issue and stop verification process here!

  • 3. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.2-develop branch.

    Details- Add the comment @magento-engcom-team give me 2.2-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
    - If the issue is reproducible on 2.2-develop branch, please add the label Reproduced on 2.2.x

  • 4. If the issue is not relevant or is not reproducible any more, feel free to close it.

@Thundar
Copy link
Contributor

Thundar commented Nov 29, 2018

I can confirm both the issue and the analysis. The bug has been introduced in Magento 2.2.6 by this commit 1115b3f#diff-4fbd3d4201dcd6192396c81a56a4a850
and was meant to solve this issue: #16273

Actually I see no reason why the exclamation mark had to be removed: there is no reason why you should have the ___store parameter set when you have the "use store code in urls" set to yes.

@magento-engcom-team magento-engcom-team added the Fixed in 2.3.x The issue has been fixed in 2.3 release line label Dec 19, 2018
magento-engcom-team added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 19, 2018
…e' parameter #18941 #19135

 - Merge Pull Request #19135 from Nazar65/magento2:issue-18941
 - Merged commits:
   1. 0e8cd9f
   2. 300772d
   3. b9a37ce
   4. 1378074
   5. 70d76c7
   6. 2e5697d
   7. b9f72f7
   8. 22edbb9
   9. 3c869e7
magento-engcom-team added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 19, 2018
…e' parameter #18941 #19135

 - Merge Pull Request #19135 from Nazar65/magento2:issue-18941
 - Merged commits:
   1. 0e8cd9f
   2. 300772d
   3. b9a37ce
   4. 1378074
   5. 70d76c7
   6. 2e5697d
   7. b9f72f7
   8. 22edbb9
   9. 3c869e7
   10. f1363cf
@Nazar65 Nazar65 mentioned this issue Dec 22, 2018
4 tasks
@magento-engcom-team
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @LucaGallinari. Thank you for your report.
The issue has been fixed in #19945 by @Nazar65 in 2.2-develop branch
Related commit(s):

The fix will be available with the upcoming 2.2.8 release.

@magento-engcom-team magento-engcom-team added the Fixed in 2.2.x The issue has been fixed in 2.2 release line label Jan 2, 2019
@abrittis
Copy link

Will this issue be fixed in 2.1.x? This is a pretty serious issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: Store Event: mm18nyc Fixed in 2.2.x The issue has been fixed in 2.2 release line Fixed in 2.3.x The issue has been fixed in 2.3 release line Issue: Clear Description Gate 2 Passed. Manual verification of the issue description passed Issue: Confirmed Gate 3 Passed. Manual verification of the issue completed. Issue is confirmed Issue: Format is valid Gate 1 Passed. Automatic verification of issue format passed Issue: Ready for Work Gate 4. Acknowledged. Issue is added to backlog and ready for development Reproduced on 2.2.x The issue has been reproduced on latest 2.2 release Reproduced on 2.3.x The issue has been reproduced on latest 2.3 release
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants