http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=8007 --- Comment #44 from Galen Charlton <gmcharlt@gmail.com> --- Jonathan: first, let me thank you for engaging with DBIC. (In reply to Kyle M Hall from comment #43)
(In reply to Chris Cormack from comment #41)
I have to say, I am really not a fan of the ::DataObject:: and ::Service:: idea. I may be overruled on that I guess. I'd prefer a Discharge class I think.
I believe in our developer discussions at KohaCon13 the basic consensus was that the DataObject layer was not needed and was just over-complicating everything and adding unnecessary overhead ( it was only in our initial designs to join biblio and biblioitems virtually ).
I agree. There are *some* specific cases, most notably bibs, where an intermediate class might be useful to deal with legacy defects in the current data model, and some cases where complicated business logic suggests a container class, but I am not in favor of creating DataObject classes or the like automatically. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.