| Summary: | Regression - Date of birth entered without correct format causes internal server error | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Nick Clemens (kidclamp) <nick> |
| Component: | Circulation | Assignee: | Nick Clemens (kidclamp) <nick> |
| Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | Tomás Cohen Arazi (tcohen) <tomascohen> |
| Severity: | major | ||
| Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | fridolin.somers, gmcharlt, kyle.m.hall, kyle, tomascohen, victor, wainuiwitikapark |
| Version: | Main | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
| Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
| Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: |
21.11.00,21.05.01,20.11.07,20.05.13
|
|
| Circulation function: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | 27937, 28351 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
| Attachments: |
Bug 28538: Insert formatted date if valid
Bug 28538: Insert formatted date if valid Bug 28538: Insert formatted date if valid |
||
|
Description
Nick Clemens (kidclamp)
2021-06-09 17:59:20 UTC
Created attachment 121745 [details] [review] Bug 28538: Insert formatted date if valid This patch restores the setting of the date from bug 27937 and adds a parsing of the date to ensure the correct format To test: 1 - Follow test plan from bug 27937 - it fails 2 - Follow test plan from bug 28351 - it succeeds 3 - Apply patch 4 - Repeat 1-2 5 - both plans pass now Created attachment 121784 [details] [review] Bug 28538: Insert formatted date if valid This patch restores the setting of the date from bug 27937 and adds a parsing of the date to ensure the correct format To test: 1 - Follow test plan from bug 27937 - it fails 2 - Follow test plan from bug 28351 - it succeeds 3 - Apply patch 4 - Repeat 1-2 5 - both plans pass now Signed-off-by: Andrew Fuerste-Henry <andrew@bywatersolutions.com> Created attachment 121882 [details] [review] Bug 28538: Insert formatted date if valid This patch restores the setting of the date from bug 27937 and adds a parsing of the date to ensure the correct format To test: 1 - Follow test plan from bug 27937 - it fails 2 - Follow test plan from bug 28351 - it succeeds 3 - Apply patch 4 - Repeat 1-2 5 - both plans pass now Signed-off-by: Andrew Fuerste-Henry <andrew@bywatersolutions.com> Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io> Both test plans followed and works as expected. i.e. no regressions introduced, and the 'fixed' behaviour is re-introduced. There's an unadvertised input size change, that makes sense :-D No QA complaints. Pushed to master for 21.11, thanks to everybody involved! Pushed to 21.05.x for 21.05.01 Pushed to 20.11.x for 20.11.07 Backported: Pushed to 20.05.x branch for 20.05.13 Should this be backported to 19.11.x? For 19.11.19? Should this be backported to 19.11.x? For 19.11.20? hi, there is a missing dependency[1] so it shouldn't be possible to backport and 19.11.x shouldn't be affected by this regression. [1] "Depends on" field => the bug linked => they aren't in 19.11.x Not backported to 19.11.x Missing dependancy |