I'm am totally in favor of merging borrowers and deletedborrowers! I think the same could be said for most if not all of the deleted/old tables. Kyle http://www.kylehall.info ByWater Solutions ( http://bywatersolutions.com ) Meadville Public Library ( http://www.meadvillelibrary.org ) Crawford County Federated Library System ( http://www.ccfls.org ) Mill Run Technology Solutions ( http://millruntech.com ) On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Druart < jonathan.druart@bugs.koha-community.org> wrote:
Some of the existing constraints are wrong, some does not exist. On the 3 bug reports (see original message), I have submitted patches to add/fix the FK constraint, but we will loose data. The big advantage is... not to loose these data :) For the major part of the existing foreign keys, we can keep them, even if the patron is "deleted". We will need to provide a script to really remove the patrons a library would want to delete.
2016-01-13 15:57 GMT+00:00 Marcel de Rooy <M.de.Rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>:
Do not forget all cascaded updates and deletes. If you only set the flag, you will still need to perform those. What would be the big advantage of doing this?
I am wondering why do we have a borrowers and a deletedborrowers tables when a "delete" flag in the borrowers table could do the trick.
Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/