Bug 426238
Summary: | Bugzilla - RPC2 support in xmlrpc.cgi | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Community] Bugzilla | Reporter: | Noura El hawary <nelhawar> |
Component: | Bugzilla General | Assignee: | Noura El hawary <nelhawar> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 3.2 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2007-12-31 22:29:39 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 406071, 427053 |
Description
Noura El hawary
2007-12-19 14:52:51 UTC
Hmmm, now that I have engaged my brain I think that this should really be "move Red Hat's Bugzilla::RPC & Bugzilla::RPC2 to upstream's Bugzilla::WebService" I think they are passing most parameters by single hash. Related to bug id #426239 A solution foe this bug, That I attempted and it worked was to have another xmlrpc.cgi file for Bugzilla/RPC2/* called xmlrpc2.cgi which will be exactly similar to xmlrpc.cgi only little changes will be applied so using historical data current LOC in xmlrpc.cgi = 91 LOC so it will be similat for xmlrpc2.cgi (In reply to comment #1) > Hmmm, now that I have engaged my brain I think that this should really be > > "move Red Hat's Bugzilla::RPC & Bugzilla::RPC2 to upstream's > Bugzilla::WebService" > > I think they are passing most parameters by single hash. I agree with Kevin. This bug should probably be removed from the requirements list in favor of just making our current RPC1 API work with the upstream WebService structure. In doing this we will also feel the benefit of the named params of RPC2 as upstream is already doing similar in their WebService code. Do you agree we should close this?
> Do you agree we should close this?
I agree,, as in the process of making out API work with the upstream we will be
converting the parameters to hashes anyways as how they do already in the
upstream the have hash ref called $params passed to all of their xmlrpc functions
closing |