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

Fix EZP-29608: better output of updateserachindexsolr #206

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

gggeek
Copy link
Collaborator

@gggeek gggeek commented Jan 26, 2017

By default updateserachindex solr output is all mixed up and duplicated when run via ezpublish/console. This PR fixes that

Copy link
Member

@bdunogier bdunogier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No problem for me besides the review remarks.

But No description provided., please... :)

{
if ( $this->CLI->isQuiet() )
return;
//print( $string );
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To remove.

//print( $string );
fwrite(STDOUT, $string);
if ( $addEOL )
//print( $this->endlineString() );
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To remove.

Why did you use fwrite(STDOUT) instead of $this->CLI ?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's described in the related issue :-P

In short: STDOUT avoids problems with ob_start and friends. Without it, the output of the script becomes messy, at least when run thru ezp/console: some lines get repeated twice or even more, at different points in time)

@gggeek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gggeek commented Jan 26, 2017

Comments taken into account. Also added more info on the issue at https://jira.ez.no/browse/EZP-26908

@gggeek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gggeek commented Nov 26, 2017

ping

@gggeek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gggeek commented Mar 18, 2018

Anyone up for review ?

@peterkeung
Copy link
Collaborator

+1

1 similar comment
@pkamps
Copy link
Contributor

pkamps commented Mar 21, 2018

+1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants