https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=32610
--- Comment #35 from Katrin Fischer <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Pedro Amorim from comment #34) > Not a blocker, but why the design decision of restricting a date attribute > type to not be able to also be repeatable? > > I can't find many good examples of how a repeatable date field would be > useful, but I don't understand why we wouldn't allow it either. Mostly because I wanted to keep it a bit more simple and thought that could still be done later if required. I had picked this up to work on in my free time, because it seemed something that people were interested in, but it grew quickly and got more complicated than I had first imagined. I think I'd definitely need some help to solve the import issue (good testing btw!) and probably the tests as well. I am also a bit worried about the batch patron edit - at the time of me writing this patch set I had some trouble testing it because of a blocking bug. -- 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/
