https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=37815 Jake Deery <jake.deery@ptfs-europe.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |36085 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=36085 [Bug 36085] Setting and unsetting the protected flag should be limited to superlibrarian accounts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=37815 carthur@slolibrary.org <carthur@slolibrary.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |carthur@slolibrary.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=37815 --- Comment #2 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- (In reply to David Cook from comment #1)

This is a good reminder that we need to do more in modules and less in Perl scripts.

Looking again at members/memberentry.pl, this is how we create a patron: Koha::Patron->new( \%newdata )->store( { guarantors => \@guarantors } ); I keep coming up with designs and then forgetting them because of other priorities, but something like... try { Koha::Patron->create({ user => $user, data => $newdata, guarantors => $guarantors, }); } catch { #blah blah blah } Maybe even a "policy" attribute if we want to compute things like system preferences in advance for better performance on bulk changes. Or maybe we update the "new" constructor to take a user object. In theory, the controller should just be managing input/output. -- But... that's easy for me to say. Doing that kind of refactoring is a huge pain so we let inertia keep us going with the status quo... Maybe there's some kind of transitional middleground we just haven't thought of yet. I know there's other bugs for doing data validation. It's something that needs to happen at some point, but we'll need a good design and some agreement. I think the scariest bit is actually the perceived effort in doing UI work for the exception handling... I'm actually doing some local work on restrictions. Maybe I'll have a think about a lightweight way to start doing this which can be gently applied... hmmm... Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox heh. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.