[Koha-bugs] [Bug 25260] Merge 'reserves' and 'old_reserves' into a new 'holds' table

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25260

--- Comment #69 from Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize at ptfs-europe.com> ---
I can't find a guideline for DB field names (other than the tablename_id one..
which I wasn't aware of before.. I far prefer just 'id' for primary key and
'tablename_id' for relations.. as for me that makes it much clearer (and it
makes dbic much happier when auto-building schema's.. you don't end up with a
relation that has the same name as the field accessor).

I kinda like the idea of sticking to the API field guidelines for new tables
where we can.. but I'm not hugely worried.. I just think it's clearer if we can
be consistent as much as possible:
https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Coding_Guidelines_-_API#SWAGGER1.3.4:_mapping

So.. my vote would be for 'action_date' as opposed to 'action_on'.. and perhaps
adding a DB Guidelines to say 'Where creating new, DB fields should match the
API field name guidelines'

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.