http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14610 Brendan Gallagher <brendan@bywatersolutions.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |brendan@bywatersolutions.co | |m --- Comment #128 from Brendan Gallagher <brendan@bywatersolutions.com> --- (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #127)
First I've seen this bug, I like the feature as a whole..
From a QA perspective I think I agree with Katrin and Jonathan. As much as I'm not as totally against splitting up some of the code into smaller more manageable files I think having a standard approach to coding this stuff is important for developers to adopts and adhere to, and I feel there isn't sufficient reasoning here to split the script into multiple smaller scripts. A clearly written $op eq '' set is pretty darn clear and it makes the relation between tt -> pl and pm clearer too.
I'd prefer the single script approach here.
After doing some searching through the code, I don't see what Kyle is proposing, as a new model (there are some examples where this is the case). Also, stated above the individual .pl files don't have an association with the tt. Since this isn't a new model, should we reject it based on that? I just am not crazy about seeing a developer spend time on a development (that has followed other models), and have to rewrite the code. Also to be clear, I see validity in both approaches (not one over the other). My worry is just the amount of time it would take to consolidate something that isn't a "new" way of development. Perhaps that time spent could be used towards other areas of Koha? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.