https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=21853
--- Comment #15 from Julian Maurice <[email protected]> --- (In reply to M. Tompsett from comment #14) > (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #11) > > And move to the Koha namespace if they are refactored? Would be good > > candidates for more object oriented approach, i guess. > > Valid point. Perhaps moving to C4 is the better first step? > Koha should have beautiful refactored code. But all the code in Koha is beautiful ! (in its own special way :)) The coding guidelines says (PERL15): > Whenever it makes sense, code added to the Koha:: namespace should be > object-oriented. However, code that is naturally procedural should not be > shoehorned into the OO style. Modules in the Koha:: namespace should not > reference the C4:: namespace, with the exception of C4::Context. IMO it doesn't make sense for these modules to be in OO style and they don't use C4:: modules except C4::Context (a rule that is not even followed in master, just run `git grep C4 Koha/`). I don't see why these modules should be denied access to Koha namespace. I won't oppose moving them to C4 if you think it's better. There's just not enough justifications for it IMO. -- 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/
