https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=28057
--- Comment #17 from Nick Clemens <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #16) > Why aren't we going further here? > > IMO we should completely remove the code related to biblioitemnumber. > > This comment: > 405 ## Here we go backwards again to create hash of biblioitemnumber to > itemnumbers > 406 ## this is important when we have analytic items which may be on > another record > > It implies that we must use biblioitemnumber to be correct, but we actually > should use biblionumber. > > Is this correct? The comment is meant to describe what we are doing so that we can fix it in the future I don't go further to keep this small for backporting, but I agree, we should rewrite much of this -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://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/
