View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0021996||mantisbt||api soap||public||2016-11-30 13:54||2019-02-06 15:30|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0021996: Service mc_project_get_issues not return closed issues|
//referencia a webservice mantis
In c# mc_project_get_issues do not return closed issues, only issues thar not closed.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
I would expect that the test fail.
Got email from rombert, he will check next week
For the record, here is the (confirmed) reason the unit test fails 0022001
This behavior is confirmed in both 1.3.x and master branches.
See PR https://github.com/mantisbt/mantisbt/pull/965 for the fix of the unit test
I think the current behaviour should stay as it is, since it's been long done this way and we risk breaking existing integrations.
There are at least two ways of retrieving all issues:
Using the mc_filter_search_issues SOAP API call might also work, but I did not check it.
@rquintana, would that work for you?
@rombert, thanks for the feedback.
I agree we should be careful not to break existing applications relying on a behavior of the API.
That being said, the current behavior of mc_project_get_issues() is somewhat confusing, as one's expectation is that it would indeed retrieve all issues (it was apparently also the case for you, since you initially wrote the test script along these lines).
If the decision is the status quo, I would propose that
With regards to amending the test script as per your comment 
To achieve that, would you recommend that the test takes $g_hide_status_default into consideration ? Or that we just drop the testGetProjectClosedIssues case entirely ?
ping @rombert for
|2016-11-30 13:54||rquintana||New Issue|
|2016-11-30 19:49||atrol||Note Added: 0054647|
|2016-11-30 19:50||atrol||Status||new => acknowledged|
|2016-12-01 08:28||dregad||Relationship added||related to 0010969|
|2016-12-01 09:18||atrol||Note Added: 0054652|
|2016-12-01 11:38||dregad||Note Added: 0054655|
|2016-12-01 11:38||dregad||Relationship added||related to 0022001|
|2016-12-01 12:01||dregad||Status||acknowledged => confirmed|
|2016-12-01 12:01||dregad||Note Added: 0054657|
|2016-12-03 16:51||rombert||Status||confirmed => feedback|
|2016-12-03 16:51||rombert||Note Added: 0054669|
|2016-12-05 06:00||dregad||Note Added: 0054675|
|2017-01-09 18:02||atrol||Note Added: 0055007|
|2017-01-17 14:39||rombert||Note Added: 0055187|
|2017-01-17 14:39||rombert||Note Edited: 0055187||View Revisions|
|2017-01-17 14:40||rombert||Note Edited: 0055187||View Revisions|
|2019-02-06 15:30||atrol||Relationship added||related to 0025102|