Return to Project-GC

Welcome to Project-GC Q&A. Ask questions and get answers from other Project-GC users.

If you get a good answer, click the checkbox on the left to select it as the best answer.

Upvote answers or questions that have helped you.

If you don't get clear answers, edit your question to make it clearer.

New cache notifiers - First log URL incorrect

+2 votes

The New cache notifiers send out a log when a new cache gets its first found it log. I have noticed recently that the URL for the cache in that message is incorrect and listed as

The URL previously reflected the cache that corresponded with the actual cache.

I've provided some example screenshots:

Looking at past emails the URL was correct on Oct 6th but all notifications since Oct 8th have listed the URL as

asked Oct 13, 2019 in Bug reports by Trexer0 (260 points)

2 Answers

–1 vote
GL stands for Geocaching Log - this URL points to the log itself. In the email the cache GC code is a link that points to the cache.

I think the Log URL is correct as the email really talks about the log itself, as can be seen in the three lines immediately above, and not about the cache.  And there is a need for a link to the actual log, in case it is formatted in a way that does not translate to the email.

There is a link to the cache already. Although there is a change in the format of the email, there is no fault of loss of data.
answered Oct 14, 2019 by the Seagnoid (Expert) (40,330 points)
Thanks for the response and clarifying that this is actually the specific geocaching log link that is incorrect.

I still believe there is a bug in the system and that the provided log URL is incorrect.
All my new cache notifier emails since October 8th list the first log with a URL of " "
That links to a log placed on a 2016 cache in Germany. I have no cache notifiers outside of North America.

From the examples I listed above the correct log URLs would be:

They are all listed with the URL which is incorrect

I believe this demonstrates a problem. I don't follow what you mean by "no fault of loss of data"
+1 vote
Best answer
We are currently looking into it and have a workaround in our development environment. We just need to make a better fix before releasing it.

It's the numeric IDs behind these alphanum IDs that has gotten too large for the math in our converter.

888640010 can be converted to GL101MY7P and back, except that it's not working in our code.
answered Oct 15, 2019 by magma1447 (Admin) (220,810 points)
selected Nov 28, 2019 by Trexer0