Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ensure api/v3/utils.php required before civicrm_api3_create_error #28068

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

chriscant
Copy link
Contributor

Overview

Ensure api/v3/utils.php required before civicrm_api3_create_error called in scheduled job

Before

An error in a scheduled job attempts to call civicrm_api3_create_error() within the createError() method in Civi\API\Kernel.
However in this instance, this call is not available and so an exception is thrown.

See: https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/4751

After

The change adds in a single line to bring in the definition of civicrm_api3_create_error() so the call can proceed as expected.

require_once "api/v3/utils.php";

Technical Details

Comments

Copy link

civibot bot commented Nov 8, 2023

🤖 Thank you for contributing to CiviCRM! ❤️ We will need to test and review this PR. 👷

Introduction for new contributors...
  • If this is your first PR, an admin will greenlight automated testing with the command ok to test or add to whitelist.
  • A series of tests will automatically run. You can see the results at the bottom of this page (if there are any problems, it will include a link to see what went wrong).
  • A demo site will be built where anyone can try out a version of CiviCRM that includes your changes.
  • If this process needs to be repeated, an admin will issue the command test this please to rerun tests and build a new demo site.
  • Before this PR can be merged, it needs to be reviewed. Please keep in mind that reviewers are volunteers, and their response time can vary from a few hours to a few weeks depending on their availability and their knowledge of this particular part of CiviCRM.
  • A great way to speed up this process is to "trade reviews" with someone - find an open PR that you feel able to review, and leave a comment like "I'm reviewing this now, could you please review mine?" (include a link to yours). You don't have to wait for a response to get started (and you don't have to stop at one!) the more you review, the faster this process goes for everyone 😄
  • To ensure that you are credited properly in the final release notes, please add yourself to contributor-key.yml
  • For more information about contributing, see CONTRIBUTING.md.
Quick links for reviewers...

➡️ Online demo of this PR 🔗

@civicrm-builder
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

1 similar comment
@civicrm-builder
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@civibot civibot bot added the master label Nov 8, 2023
@colemanw
Copy link
Member

colemanw commented Nov 8, 2023

@civicrm-builder add to whitelist

@colemanw
Copy link
Member

colemanw commented Nov 8, 2023

Thanks @chriscant this fix looks good!

@colemanw colemanw added the merge ready PR will be merged after a few days if there are no objections label Nov 8, 2023
@eileenmcnaughton
Copy link
Contributor

@chriscant I'm pretty sure you tagged this as a regression - in which case we should try to merge to 5.68 - are you able to switch branch or put up a separate PR against 5.68?

@chriscant
Copy link
Contributor Author

It was jaapjansma that tagged it as a regression. I'll try to do a separate PR against 5.68.

@chriscant
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hopefully done correctly here: #28079

@colemanw colemanw closed this Nov 9, 2023
@colemanw
Copy link
Member

colemanw commented Nov 9, 2023

Yes, and that will get forward-merged to master so we can close this.

@chriscant chriscant deleted the civi-api-kernel-error branch November 9, 2023 16:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
master merge ready PR will be merged after a few days if there are no objections
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants