[Koha-devel] Get rid of item-level_itype?

[Jonathan Druart]

I promise to let you name one of the variables of the patches if you
give me some feedbacks :)

2015-12-17 16:41 GMT+00:00 Jonathan Druart
<jonathan.druart at bugs.koha-community.org>:
> Thanks all for your answers.
>
> I have played a bit with the code, and I would propose the following:
>
> Update DB migration:
> 1/ add column biblio.biblio_type
> 2/ update biblio.biblio_type with biblioitems.itemtype
> 3/ rename items.itype with items.item_type
> 4/ set items.item_type = biblio.biblio_type if items.item_type is not
> defined (or if item_level_itypes is not set?)
> 5/ rename deleteditems.itype with items.item_type, and don't update it (right?)
> 6/ drop column biblioitems.itemtype
> 7/ rename course_items.itype with course_items.item_type (to be consistent)
>
> Then we will have to replace the notices ^items.itype^items.item_type^
> and ^biblioitems.itemtype^biblio.biblio_type^ should solve the
> problem.
>
> Looking at the code, I have found some places where I am not sure how
> to fix the display:
> 1/ For instance on the detail page of a biblio, or when a user place a
> hold, the item type is display either *on top* of the items list, or
> *in* a specific column of the table.
> Which makes sense. If we remove the pref, we have 3 choices:
>   a. always display the item type in the table
>   b. display the item type on top only if all item types are identical
> at the biblio type (will require some additional loops)
>   c. display both and set a css class: the library will be able to
> hide the one it wants
>   d. the answer d
>
> 2/ The change will require a complete reindexation of zebra: the index
> will be renamed  (itype => item_type, mc-itype => mc-item_type,
> itemtype => biblio_type, mc-itemtype => mc-biblio_type).
> Is it acceptable?
>
> I think I can  produce a patch in 2 days of work (which is nothing
> compared to the number of days Koha developpers have lost to
> understand how this code works...), but it will require a lot of deep
> testing.
> It will really hard to provide tests for this change since it impacts
> a lot of file, but I will write some for the most common subroutines.
>
> I would like some people engaged in the signoff process, not to let
> the patches in the signoff queue too long.
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
> 2015-12-11 12:04 GMT+00:00 Jonathan Druart
> <jonathan.druart at bugs.koha-community.org>:
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> Friday is a good day for this kind of questions, fasten your seat belt
>> for a time travel.
>>
>> As many of you know, the item type is not correctly managed all around
>> the different Koha modules. Sometimes it's, sometimes it's not.
>> The main issue is that we deal with it at too many places and the code
>> is not clean/centralised at all.
>>
>> So I have searched for previous discussions on this subject and I have
>> found this "Abandoned RFC" on the wiki :
>> http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Mandate_item-level_circulation_rules_RFC
>> filled from this koha-devel thread
>> http://lists.koha-community.org/pipermail/koha-devel/2008-October/031144.html
>>
>> The questions are:
>> 1/ Is this still valid?
>> 2/ Is there something missing in the different steps described?
>> 3/ Does someone have some other suggestions to do?
>>
>> I would be happy to provide this change but first I would like to get
>> confirmation about it and get people involved in signoffing/QAing the
>> possible patch set.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan