https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=35904
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Druart <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #5) > (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #4) > > Test plan: > > Read the code and confirm that everything makes sense. > > QA: Do you have a better way for this? Yes it's dirty! > > There may be a better way, but *niet uit de losse mouw* (not off the cuff?). > So I agree that it is dirty and only convenient for the unit tests. Since > Auth is already a problem, why make it worse with convenience parameters for > testing only? Could we address the lengthy tests in the .t itself? > At first glance I am not convinced if we should proceed like this. The other way is to refactor C4::Auth. As you know I am not a fan of dirty code, and this is the only way I found to introduce as less change as possible, and (I think!) safely. -- 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/
