Description of problem: When Bug::search is called with 'quicksearch' or 'savedsearch' option, the included bugs do not contain any attribute: $ python Python 2.7.2 (default, Oct 27 2011, 01:40:22) [GCC 4.6.1 20111003 (Red Hat 4.6.1-10)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> ... >>> proxy <ServerProxy for partner-bugzilla.redhat.com/xmlrpc.cgi> >>> proxy.Bug.search({'savedsearch':'mkosek: processed IPA bugs', 'include_fields': [ 'id', 'summary', 'status'], }) {'bugs': [{}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}]} >>> >>> >>> proxy.Bug.search({'quicksearch':'product:"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6" component:"ipa" flag:rhel-6.3.0+', 'include_fields': [ 'id', 'summary', 'status']}) {'bugs': [{}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}, {}]} Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.2.1-0.b27 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. Call Bug::search XMLRPC call with 'quicksearch' or 'savedsearch' option 2. 3. Actual results: Empty bug records are returned Expected results: Bug records with bug attributes are returned Additional info: Bug attributes were returned for standard XMLRPC Bug::search query
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 816038 ***
Simon, are you sure this is a duplicate of Bug 816038? In this case, I passed the list of fields and the result was still empty bug record.
(In reply to comment #2) > Simon, are you sure this is a duplicate of Bug 816038? In this case, I passed > the list of fields and the result was still empty bug record. Yes, I'm 99% sure. v4.2.1-0.b38 wasn't release until 2:02pm UTC (just over an hour after your last comment), which would explain why you were still seeing the bad result. If you are still seeing the bad result, please reopen this bug. -- simon
Calls without include_fields now return filled bugs, but there are other issues -> Bug 816953.