https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14769
--- Comment #36 from Julian Maurice <[email protected]> --- (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 > swapped. 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 indicator. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
