https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=26346
--- Comment #74 from Tomás Cohen Arazi <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Alex Buckley from comment #73) > (In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #69) > > Shouldn't we have a single 'allowed_to_change' column as an > > ENUM('owner','everyone','staff') ? > > Hi Tomás, > > I've had more of a think about this, and discussed with Chris C and Aleisha. > Here are our thoughts: > > 1. Introducing a single 'allowed_to_change' column should be done on a > different bug report. This bug report is adding an enhancement. Introducing > a single 'allowed_to_change' column would require existing permission logic > for 'owners' and 'everyone' to be altered which is outside the scope of this > enhancement. > > 2. As we understand it currently a list can have a combination of > permissions, hence why multiple columns were originally introduced. See > https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18228#c2 > > Furthermore in comment #67 I noted a 'staff only' list has both > allow_change_from_owner=1 and allow_change_from_staff=1. > > Merging these separate columns into a single 'allowed_to_change' column > would eliminate the granularity that's currently available, so we wonder if > it's not the best solution. > > All of that being the case, I'm marking this patchset as 'Needs signoff', as > it's been rebased. Happy to hear your thoughts though! Sounds like a good review of the current status of the feature. And makes sense. I will poke at it tomorrow. My 'fear' is we could be adding some technical debt. As I said, I'll be happy to review 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/
