|
Sort Order:
I have made some changes to this code now, and it should only fail if there is an actual conflict of information. This work needs some extensive testing though, and is available for testing at http://test.musicbrainz.org Just tried a track time & track name edit, which worked as expected (edit #14460217 and edit #14460218 on test.musicbrainz.org) Also tried a track name edit followed by another track name edit before the first closed, which failed as expected (but didn't give any warning that it was likely to do so when the second edit was made - I'll file a separate bug for this user experience enhancement). The third thing I tried was to repeat the edit where track times were set for a 15 track release, and then a 16th track was added to the release (edits #14460220 and #14460221 on the test server) The track times edit closed and applied, but the 16th track edit refused to close despite a 3Y/0N vote and several hours passing. Trying to force it to close & apply threw up the following error: Caught exception in MusicBrainz::Server::Controller::Test->accept_edit "Failed query: Can be replicated by going to http://test.musicbrainz.org/test/accept-edit/14460220 Thank you so much for your detailed testing! I fixed I've addressed that issue with new tracks (or more, tracks with new recordings) now, and your edit was accepted. This work will still be around until monday on test, if you feel like poking it anymore |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bug
Closed
Normal
Adding track times has caused a failed dependency for an edit which changed the track titles.
'
Something similar happened with http://musicbrainz.org/edit/14578430
which was an edit to set the track times for the first 15 tracks on a release. http://musicbrainz.org/edit/14578385
had been entered just before it which was to add a 16th track without touching the original 15 tracks.
I don't see why the edits would conflict, but if there is genuinely a problem, the system shouldn't have allowed me to enter an edit that was doomed to fail (unless it got the 3 yes votes and closed first and presumably 14578385 would have failed instead).