exception when trying to attach file to trac ticket #2241
Labels
No Label
0.2.0
0.3.0
0.4.0
0.5.0
0.5.1
0.6.0
0.6.1
0.7.0
0.8.0
0.9.0
1.0.0
1.1.0
1.10.0
1.10.1
1.10.2
1.10a2
1.11.0
1.12.0
1.12.1
1.13.0
1.14.0
1.15.0
1.15.1
1.2.0
1.3.0
1.4.1
1.5.0
1.6.0
1.6.1
1.7.0
1.7.1
1.7β
1.8.0
1.8.1
1.8.2
1.8.3
1.8β
1.9.0
1.9.0-s3branch
1.9.0a1
1.9.0a2
1.9.0b1
1.9.1
1.9.2
1.9.2a1
LeastAuthority.com automation
blocker
cannot reproduce
cloud-branch
code
code-dirnodes
code-encoding
code-frontend
code-frontend-cli
code-frontend-ftp-sftp
code-frontend-magic-folder
code-frontend-web
code-mutable
code-network
code-nodeadmin
code-peerselection
code-storage
contrib
critical
defect
dev-infrastructure
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
fixed
invalid
major
minor
n/a
normal
operational
packaging
somebody else's problem
supercritical
task
trivial
unknown
was already fixed
website
wontfix
worksforme
No Milestone
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Reference: tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25#2241
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
ambimorph got this error, and I found this exception in the trac.log:
She reports that she then tried the exact same operation again -- attaching the exact same file to the exact same ticket, and this time it worked.
[The Timeline]timeline?from=Jun+4%2C+2014&daysback=1&authors=&changeset=on&milestone=on&ticket=on&ticket_details=on&wiki=on&update=Update shows her successful attachment operation.
Doubtless this is related to #1581, although note that we upgraded to trac v1.0.1 since #1581 last reared its ugly head.
Does that traceback suggest that the tracspamfilter was trying to convert the attached file into.. XML? Or maybe the metadata about the attachment request? What on earth does it use XML for?
The tracspamfilter was enabled after the last reported instance of #1581, which suggests that this is a different issue.
Could be related to #2270.