Opened on 07/23/2015 at 10:20:54 AM

Closed on 02/25/2016 at 02:54:34 PM

#2813 closed defect (fixed)

Using runserver cms returns 500 status code for /subscriptions

Reported by: greiner Assignee: juliandoucette
Priority: P3 Milestone:
Module: Websites Keywords: goodfirstbug
Cc: trev, kzar, sebastian Blocked By:
Blocking: Platform: Unknown / Cross platform
Ready: yes Confidential: no
Tester: Unknown Verified working: no
Review URL(s):

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29336582

Description (last modified by sebastian)

Environment

Ubuntu 14.04

How to reproduce

  1. Clone cms and web.adblockplus.org repositories
  2. Run pyinstaller runserver.spec in cms directory (as described in the cms README)
  3. Run <path-to-cms>/dist/runserver in web.adblockplus.org directory
  4. Navigate to http://localhost:5000/en/subscriptions in your browser

Observed behaviour

Error page shown:

500 Internal Server Error
An error occurred while processing the request for /en/subscriptions:
No module named sitescripts.subscriptions

Expected behaviour

The get_subscriptions filter in web.adblockplus.org should handle the sitescripts.subscriptions module being missing, not raising an exception, but simply returning an empty list.

Attachments (0)

Change History (7)

comment:1 Changed on 08/27/2015 at 02:14:44 PM by sebastian

  • Cc trev kzar sebastian added

I'm undecided whether we should bundle the sitescripts.subscriptions module with the exectuable. Or whether we should rather make the get_subscriptions filter return an empty list (and log a warning) if that module doesn't exist.

comment:2 Changed on 09/02/2015 at 09:05:46 AM by kzar

@Sebastian The latter in my opinion. If you're just trying to test a completely unrelated change it's kind of annoying having to get sitescripts set up as well.

comment:3 Changed on 09/02/2015 at 09:19:38 AM by sebastian

  • Component changed from Sitescripts to Websites
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Priority changed from Unknown to P3
  • Ready set

Yeah, that is also what I tend to. Bundling arbitrary modules with the general purpose development server doesn't seem to be right. And as you pointed out simply bundling that module wouldn't suffice in this case anyway.

comment:4 Changed on 09/02/2015 at 09:20:10 AM by sebastian

  • Keywords goodfirstbug added

comment:5 Changed on 02/18/2016 at 10:52:15 AM by juliandoucette

  • Owner set to juliandoucette

comment:6 Changed on 02/18/2016 at 11:04:05 AM by juliandoucette

  • Review URL(s) modified (diff)
  • Status changed from new to reviewing

comment:7 Changed on 02/25/2016 at 02:54:34 PM by juliandoucette

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from reviewing to closed

Add Comment

Modify Ticket

Change Properties
Action
as closed .
The resolution will be deleted. Next status will be 'reopened'.
to The owner will be changed from juliandoucette.
 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.