Opened 13 years ago
Last modified 13 years ago
#16705 closed Bug
r13746 makes invalid assumption that QUERY_STRING exists — at Version 10
Reported by: | raylu | Owned by: | Aymeric Augustin |
---|---|---|---|
Component: | Generic views | Version: | dev |
Severity: | Release blocker | Keywords: | |
Cc: | preston@… | Triage Stage: | Ready for checkin |
Has patch: | yes | Needs documentation: | no |
Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description (last modified by )
r13746 (from #9966) makes the assumption that QUERY_STRING exists. As this is a bad assumption, please apply the attached patch.
See also: #9435.
Change History (12)
by , 13 years ago
Attachment: | 13746_query_string.patch added |
---|
comment:1 by , 13 years ago
Easy pickings: | set |
---|---|
Needs tests: | set |
Patch needs improvement: | set |
Severity: | Normal → Release blocker |
Triage Stage: | Unreviewed → Accepted |
Patch needs tests.
A patch is also required against the new-style class-based views, as it makes the same bad (albeit, almost universally honored) assumption.
Technically this is a release blocker too, since it is a new feature in the previous release.
comment:3 by , 13 years ago
@raylu -- Your claim is demonstrably false. If it were true, there would be a failing case in the test suite.
The case of query_string=True and query_string=False may be tested; but the non-existence of QUERY_STRING in the WSGI environment *isn't* tested, because the Django test client sets QUERY_STRING by default. We need a test that demonstrates that if QUERY_STRING *isn't* in the environment, the current code fails, but your patch makes the test pass.
comment:4 by , 13 years ago
Oh. I see what you mean.
I'm not very familiar with how to write a Django test nor have I any idea what the new class-based views are, so I'll step down.
comment:5 by , 13 years ago
Owner: | changed from | to
---|
comment:6 by , 13 years ago
Easy pickings: | unset |
---|---|
Patch needs improvement: | unset |
I had to refactor the test client a bit to write tests for this issue. I modified the default environ
dictionary used by django.test.client.RequestFactory
to contain exactly the variables required by the WSGI spec (plus HTTP_COOKIE
because we want to support coookies here). The test suite still passes :)
This change is slightly backwards incompatible. If third-party code uses Django's RequestFactory
or Client
for testing, and contains bugs similar to this one (ie. rely on a variable whose presence isn't guaranteed), its tests may fail after this change. I think this minor incompatibility is acceptable in the context of a bug fix. We could even argue it's a good thing to reveal unnoticed bugs.
I made two other small changes:
CommonMiddleware
usedif request.GET:
to test if there is a query string, and then accessedrequest.META['QUERY_STRING']
. I replaced the check with:if request.META.get('QUERY_STRING', ''):
to make it obvious that it's safe to accessrequest.META['QUERY_STRING']
at the next line. This changes very subtly the behavior of "append slash" and "prepend www" redirects. Previously, invalid query strings (like'&'
) wouldn't be passed on. I can't say if it was intentional. Now they are. It's really an edge case and I think it's worth making this code more explicit. If you disagree, just don't commit this part.- I stumbled upon an unrelated typo in the generic_views tests and fixed it.
by , 13 years ago
Attachment: | 16705.patch added |
---|
comment:7 by , 13 years ago
Cc: | added |
---|
comment:8 by , 13 years ago
Needs tests: | unset |
---|---|
Triage Stage: | Accepted → Ready for checkin |
There could be objections to the changes to the test client, however they seem coupled pretty strongly to testing this patch.
There are a couple small other fixes tacked in, these seem minor enough to allow as riders to this patch.
patch applies to trunk@16829 - tests pass
comment:9 by , 13 years ago
It seems like in django/middleware/common.py what you really want is
if 'QUERY_STRING' in request.META:
Everywhere else,
args = request.META.get('QUERY_STRING')
seems to make more sense since the check on the next line is merely if args
comment:10 by , 13 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
don't assume QUERY_STRING exists