Vote #67778
完了Repository file Diff view sometimes shows more than selected file
100%
説明
I think this is related to issue #4186
You can actually reproduce by using issue #4186:
- go to issue #4186
- click on Revision 3028 in the Associated Revisions section, or just click this link: http://www.redmine.org/projects/redmine/repository/revisions/3028
- then click on the first "diff" line, or just click this link: http://www.redmine.org/projects/redmine/repository/revisions/3028/diff/trunk/lib/redmine/unified_diff.rb
- so far so good, it looks correct
- if you swap the "inline" "side by side" setting, then it shows additionally files instead of just the one file
journals
Just to be more specific, this is due to the wrong URI in the action= of the <form> around the inline/side-by-side selection. It is missing the file pathname part.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a patch for it...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@ Marc: Thanks for your contribution. Sadly the patch-file seems to be broken somehow but nevertheless I have extracted the change locally...
It includes a one-line change of source:/trunk/app/views/repositories/diff.rhtml@3938#L4
from:
<pre><code class="rhtml"><% form_tag({}, :method => 'get') do %></code></pre>
to
<pre><code class="rhtml"><% form_tag(request.request_uri, :method => 'get') do %></code></pre>
I have tested this tiny patch and it fixed the issue for me too. Dunno for sure though if this is the right way to fix this issue most effectively. I'll leave that up to the commiters.
I've targetted this issue for Redmine version#21 since it seems it can be fixed easily. Please retarget if time is missing to include this for version#21...
I've also set the affected version to devel since it's still broken in the trunk too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really like the idea of using request.request_uri, it could introduce weird bugs, but I'll take a look at this one. I confirm it could be the kind of defect we want to address in 1.0.1, but I don't know when Eric wants to stop adding issues for this one (due date is in 7 days!).
Thanks for the patch and your investigations on that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was just missing path information, fixed in r3939
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merged to 1.0-stable for release in 1.0.1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------