View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0023337mantisbtapi soappublic2017-09-11 03:51
ReportermantisiatorAssigned To 
Status newResolutionopen 
Product Version2.0.0 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0023337: mc_filter_search_issues returns too many issues when called via curl

Hi all,
When calling a Webservice in order to retrieve the (unique) issue Id asssociated to a custom field value and a project id, the function returns too many issues, as if the filter (described hereafter) was not working.

Does someone has any hint please ?

Thank you very much in advance !

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

-<soap:Envelope xmlns:soap=""; xmlns:xsd=""; xmlns:xsi="";>
-<mc_filter_search_issues xmlns="";>


TagsNo tags attached.




2017-09-10 15:20

developer   ~0057658

Seems this is broken, indeed.



2017-09-10 15:39

developer   ~0057659

@mantisiator - this works in my limited tests with 2.6.0 . Can you retry with an updated version or provide a reproducible test case?




2017-09-10 20:14

reporter   ~0057664

Hi @rombert,
I have started the above script getBRtitle.xml with the command:

curl -d @getBRtitle.xml -o getBRtitleRep.xml

Based on your comment I will cross-check the code changes between the 2 versions.



2017-09-10 20:56

reporter   ~0057665

Further to review, I could not find diffs between the 2.6.0 and the the 2.0.0 versions implémentations in the soap api.



2017-09-10 21:11

reporter   ~0057666

In fact, further to addicitonal testing:

  • executing the script with or without the custom field filter returns the same result, as if teh query was simply returning all the issues of the project without taking into account the custom field filter.
    Note that the "Add to filter" is added in the custom field definition. Is there may be another flag to add to make the filter work on the custom fields via the soap api please ?

Thanks a lot for your help !



2017-09-11 03:05

developer   ~0057668

The 'add to filter' config should control if it is shown in the view issues page. The field should work out-of-the box. Does the user have enough access rights to query that field? Maybe run the query with an admin user to rule out that possibility.



2017-09-11 03:47

reporter   ~0057670

I have performed the test as an admin and do have the same result.
Did you do a test in 2.6.0 version with a custom field please ?



2017-09-11 03:51

developer   ~0057672

Yes, I tested with 2.6.0 ( actually latest git ) . Can you add your custom field definition?

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2017-09-10 09:37 mantisiator New Issue
2017-09-10 15:20 rombert Status new => acknowledged
2017-09-10 15:20 rombert Note Added: 0057658
2017-09-10 15:39 rombert Assigned To => rombert
2017-09-10 15:39 rombert Status acknowledged => feedback
2017-09-10 15:39 rombert Note Added: 0057659
2017-09-10 15:39 rombert Assigned To rombert =>
2017-09-10 20:14 mantisiator Note Added: 0057664
2017-09-10 20:14 mantisiator Status feedback => new
2017-09-10 20:56 mantisiator Note Added: 0057665
2017-09-10 21:11 mantisiator Note Added: 0057666
2017-09-11 03:05 rombert Note Added: 0057668
2017-09-11 03:47 mantisiator Note Added: 0057670
2017-09-11 03:51 rombert Note Added: 0057672