https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=31503 --- Comment #52 from Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> --- (In reply to Nick Clemens from comment #51) Thx for QA
Minor QA tool failure Fixed. Renamed sub, forgot POD header. Adding follow-up.
Why use AV for consents? Looking ahead to bug 20380 it seems the consents will have more options - maybe we could create a 'consent_types' table and use that? Could be done later indeed. Decided here to start with AV and its existing functionality.
Currently too - branch limits are half implemented - I don't see the tab if my only consent is branch limited - but I can force go to the page and see the consent options - was this a plan, or a side effect of choosing AV? Good catch. This is the most serious issue imo. And a blocker. Would addressing this be sufficient for you to pass QA? If not, I will probably have to switch first to Additional contents fixing. And try this again for 23.05 or 23.11.
The description displays in the form, but the title is still the AV - can let go in light of 31570, but it is lees friendly to see "Consent for GDPR_PROCESSING" Correct. Should be addressed later on.
+use constant AV_CONSENT => 'PATRON_CONSENT'; Why not just use the string in the search? Same question for existing: use constant GDPR_PROCESSING => 'GDPR_PROCESSING'; Using constants is good practice. When we add another instance, we can refer to the constant.
-- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.