On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com> wrote:

Le 12/12/2011 14:06, Marcel de Rooy a écrit :

> Hi all,
> Patch 5636 should be next in passing qa now, but these questions
> remained open:
> Style question to the community: should core pages in the staff client
> (like
>
> tools/cleanborrowers.pl) have both a templated page in the staff client
> AND a
> command-line presence, or should the commandline tool be a separate
> script in misc/?
> At this time, there doesn't seem to be any precedent for inclusion in
> the core
>
> script. Before passing this patch for QA, I'd like to get some feedback, as
> this may both open doors for us, as well as create additional work to create
> consistency of implementation for existing jobs.

My comment here :
if an ENH don't break any existing behaviour, do what it announces, and
is consistent with existing features and code, then we must welcome any
patch and don't request for an improvement of the improvement: if you
want more, just do it yourself, everybody is acting on a volunteer basis !

In this case (speaking as RM here, not as owner of the company
submitting the patch ;-) ), it should just be "passed QA", as it passes
the 3 questions: don't break existing behaviour, do what it announces,
consistent with existing feature & code. (double check if there can be a
security issue !)

--
Paul POULAIN
http://www.biblibre.com
Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc
Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08