--- Comment #36 from Julian Maurice <julian.maur...@biblibre.com> ---
(In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #35)
> > - In Koha::Authority::ControlledIndicators, there is a package variable
> > $cached_indicators. Maybe this module should use Koha::Cache instead ?
> I do not really see the advantage. We do not win time imo by saving the
> structure to the L2 cache. We could argue about putting it in L1 only (and
> check if we would gain time), but that seems not possible now. Since the
> internal structure is kept only during the lifetime of the object, the name
> could be misleading. If required, I could rename it.
I'm just saying that maybe we should use Koha::Cache for consistency (I can
totally be wrong :))
You're saying that the structure is kept only during the lifetime of the
object, but with Plack, isn't the object's lifetime infinite ?
> > Also, I'm not sure if this is a problem, but it seems that there is no way
> > to tell Koha to change only one of the two indicators.
> I am not sure if I understand this correctly. The current approach with the
> pref allows for great flexibility.
> If you say e.g. MARC21,100,ind1:auth1 you only copy the first indicator. The
> second indicator will be empty when creating a new field or will be taken
> from the biblio record when updating/merging.
> But if you say e.g. MARC21,830,,ind2:auth2 you only copy the second
> indicator. One of the unit tests contains an example where indicators are
With "MARC21,100,ind1:auth1" for instance, if I manually put something in the
2nd indicator, when I choose an authority it erases the content of the 2nd
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
Koha-bugs mailing list
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/