https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25554 Peter Vashchuk <stalkernoid@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25554 Peter Vashchuk <stalkernoid@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |slavashishkin@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25554 --- Comment #3 from Peter Vashchuk <stalkernoid@gmail.com> --- Yeah I thought about naming them similarly to what you proposed but it would undermine some decisions that were taken into consideration during refactor. The thing is, we need to add another item to "scope3" for Koha Finland, if we name those arrays something like I already did (scope1, scope2, scope3) all it requires is to add another item to array and we’re done, but if we rename those arrays like you suggested (branch_category, branch_itemtype, branch_category_itemtype) it will complicate things if we ever need to add any other element to any of those arrays. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25554 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Nugged <nugged@gmail.com> --- Here we need to have more filtering criteria for smart-rules. For Finnish libraries, we added "ccode" and "sleving_location", two extra smart rule filters (but by the way also later we propose this for the community version) so we had before: my $scope3 = [ 'branchcode', 'categorycode', 'itemtype' ]; but now we have in our case: my $scope3 = [ 'branchcode', 'categorycode', 'itemtype', 'ccode', 'shelving_location' ]; and because of having only a single variable, we don't need to change any variable names down in the file, nor copy-paste dozen times like it is now the same array copypasted everywhere. But now proposal from Jonathan to name it something like "$branch_category_itemtype" will make this: my $branch_category_itemtype = [ 'branchcode', 'categorycode', 'itemtype' ]; becoming this (???): my $branch_category_itemtype_ccode_shelving_location = [ 'branchcode', 'categorycode', 'itemtype', 'ccode', 'shelving_location' ]; so when we add two extra items, we should again change all the code down below to the new variable name $branch_category_itemtype_ccode_shelving_location? Yikes! That's why we voting for "$scope3", because we have three scope sections, even logically separated: small one, middle, and full. ... Oh, or let's name it "$scope_full" if you ok? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=25554 Andrew Nugged <nugged@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Needs Signoff |In Discussion --- Comment #7 from Andrew Nugged <nugged@gmail.com> --- But that's not only about the assignment of $RULE_KINDS on the beginning, $scope3 also used in the code further, in two places:

+my $scope3 = [ 'branchcode', 'categorycode', 'itemtype' ]; ...

my $order_by = $params->{order_by} - // { -desc => [ 'branchcode', 'categorycode', 'itemtype' ] }; + // { -desc => $scope3 };

...

# Enforce scope; a rule should be set for its defined scope, no more, no less. - foreach my $scope_level ( qw( branchcode categorycode itemtype ) ) { + foreach my $scope_level ( @$scope3 ) { if ( grep /$scope_level/, @{ $kind_info->{scope} } ) {

so just making pairs rules/scopes won't solve this, more advanced refactoring then needed. Let's think about this, yes (just thinking aloud here too :) ). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.