WTF? Files added without anime or episode?["FIXED"
Moderator: AniDB
WTF? Files added without anime or episode?["FIXED"
Could it be an AniDB client screwing the database?
http://anidb.ath.cx/perl-bin/animedb.pl ... 48&nonav=1
http://anidb.ath.cx/perl-bin/animedb.pl ... 49&nonav=1
They're Wolf's Rain 27&28 by Woofnick:
http://anidb.ath.cx/perl-bin/animedb.pl ... 48&nonav=1
http://anidb.ath.cx/perl-bin/animedb.pl ... 49&nonav=1
They're Wolf's Rain 27&28 by Woofnick:
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:43 am
- Location: Right here
(I also think that it's not related to AoM)
I wonder why AJ's files aren't affected, but it's probably related to: [EDIT][ANIME][EP]Wolf's Rain
Just guessing:
Is it possible that this was caused by an open creq that was later granted after the move? The files were associated with a new ep-id after all...
(Maybe it didn't have an immediate effect, but caused some inconsitency that was discovered and "resolved" like this later.)
I wonder why AJ's files aren't affected, but it's probably related to: [EDIT][ANIME][EP]Wolf's Rain
Just guessing:
Is it possible that this was caused by an open creq that was later granted after the move? The files were associated with a new ep-id after all...
(Maybe it didn't have an immediate effect, but caused some inconsitency that was discovered and "resolved" like this later.)
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:43 am
- Location: Right here
I suspected of a client (could be a test version, or another client, not necessarily AoM) because human filled information doesn't usually include the MD5 and SHA1 information, and I thought the direct access to the DB API that clients use instead of using the web interface might provide a chance for that kind of bug to occur.
I still think those files were entered with a client, but an wrong edition sounds like a very probable cause for the actual bug. Perhaps AJ files were moved before the change from 30 to 26 was performed, and after the change, the W-F were left in an illegal situation, that was resolved by removing the offending fields.
I still think those files were entered with a client, but an wrong edition sounds like a very probable cause for the actual bug. Perhaps AJ files were moved before the change from 30 to 26 was performed, and after the change, the W-F were left in an illegal situation, that was resolved by removing the offending fields.
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:43 am
- Location: Right here
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:43 am
- Location: Right here
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:43 am
- Location: Right here