https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=32478
--- Comment #16 from David Gustafsson <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #14) > (In reply to David Gustafsson from comment #13) > > Ok! Suppose due to forgot to fix the tests that still uses the 'NULL' value, > > will do so. Why is it odd? null is valid json, NULL is not. > > Some things are hard to explain :) > The fact that you need to type null as a valid JSON expression in a textarea > is not very appealing as to user interface. (Or even stricter, valid YAML.) > But I could certainly live with it :) Just document it clearly. > > And going bit out of scope, but why are we specifying a: [ b, c ] instead of > the pure YAML approach with something like: > a: > - b > - c > We probably need some discussion/consensus about handling all such > preferences. > > The fact that is all kind of YAML now, does however make a difference. See > next comment. Yes, but previously you still had to type and invalid subset of YAML, which should be worse? That you can use null values is documented in the preference description, where the patch changes the mentions of NULL to lowercase. both a: [ b, c ] and a: - b - c is valid YAML. The syspref documentation doesn't explicitly say the format is YAML, but I don't really see any reason to inform the user about the alternative syntax. -- 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/
