https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14957 Tomás Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|unspecified |master Status|Patch doesn't apply |Needs Signoff --- Comment #101 from Tomás Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@gmail.com> --- (In reply to David Gustafsson from comment #100)
(In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #95)
I think I might be repeating myself, probably on a different bug. But I think we should add both whitelisting and blacklisting 'MARC record overlay configurations', and then hook them into whatever place we want (i.e. for z39.50, for OAI harvsting, etc). It seems to me that we are duplicating efforts in some places, and solutions don't look generic enough.
'Protecting' is just a way to say you are blacklisting some fields on overlaying.
Now rebased again, so should work with latest master. "Protecting" is probably a little bit misleading to reflect what the patch currently does, it has been largely refactored since the first version (which I did not write). I have renamed it to MARC merge rules instead, since it is more of a framework for auto-merging records according to a set or rules.
I hadn't noticed that. We should change the bug name to reflect what this actually does.
My experience is that is is really tricky to get this right, and if trying to fit it into another abstraction that might not be suited for this exact purpose it could be more trouble than it's worth (https://www.sandimetz.com/blog/2016/1/20/the-wrong-abstraction).
While I agree with the assertion, I don't think it is the case. What I'm saying is that we could just add a boolean (whitelist/blacklist) to specify a different behaviour, using the same code and rules. That's something that would belong to a separate bug, of course. I just mentioned here because I thought 'Protect' could be avoided, which you already did :-D -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.