resolution_fixed type_defect | by rjsparks@nostrum.com
There is a line on the template that assumes any completed review will have populated the reviewed version field. There are some 2000+ 'completed' ReviewRequest objects in the database for which this is not true.
The mismatched assumption is at line 72
Error during template rendering
In template /Users/rjsparks/ietf/datatracker/rjs/6.39.1.dev0/ietf/templates/group/manage_review_requests.html, error at line 72
Reverse for 'doc_view' with arguments '()' and keyword arguments '{u'rev': u'', u'name': u'draft-ietf-roll-routing-dispatch'}' not found. 1 pattern(s) tried: ['doc/(?P<name>[A-Za-z0-9._+-]+)/(?:(?P<rev>[0-9-]+)/)?$']
62 <p>
63 {% if r.pk != None %}Requested: <a href="{% url "ietf.doc.views_review.review_request" name=r.doc.name request_id=r.pk %}">[ r.time|date:"Y-m-d" ]</a>
64 {% else %}
65 Auto-suggested
66 {% endif %}
67 </p>
68
69 {% if r.latest_reqs %}
70 {% for rlatest in r.latest_reqs %}
71 <div>
72 Revious review of <a href="{% url "doc_view" name=rlatest.doc_id rev=rlatest.reviewed_rev %}?include_text=1">{% if rlatest.doc_id != r.doc_id %}[ rlatest.doc_id ]{% endif %}-[ rlatest.reviewed_rev ]</a>
73 (<a href="[ rfcdiff_base_url ]?url1=[ rlatest.doc.name ]-[ rlatest.reviewed_rev ]&url2=[ r.doc.name ]-[ r.doc.rev ]">diff</a>):
74 <a href="{% url "ietf.doc.views_review.review_request" name=rlatest.doc_id request_id=rlatest.pk %}">{% if rlatest.result %}[ rlatest.result.name ]{% else %}result unavail.{% endif %}</a>
75 by [ rlatest.reviewer.person ]{% if rlatest.closed_review_request_event %} [ rlatest.closed_review_request_event.time.date|date ]{% endif %}
76 </div>
77 {% endfor %}
78 {% endif %}
79 </div>
80
81 <div><strong>[ r.doc.title ]</strong></div>
82
Issue migrated from trac:2086 at 2022-03-04 05:35:22 +0000
resolution_fixedtype_defect| by rjsparks@nostrum.comThere is a line on the template that assumes any completed review will have populated the reviewed version field. There are some 2000+ 'completed' ReviewRequest objects in the database for which this is not true.
The mismatched assumption is at line 72
Issue migrated from trac:2086 at 2022-03-04 05:35:22 +0000