https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=38666

--- Comment #68 from Victor Grousset/tuxayo <[email protected]> ---
> If this is on the right track

That's best to be confirmed with the libraries that expressed interest in this
feature. (also, I see earlier comments from people at Open Fifth and ByWater
showing interest)

Once confirmed or adjusted. The safest before investing more work might be to
reach the wider community to confirm there isn't a **functional blocker**.
Hopefully not, then your **functional scope will be secured and locked**.
Otherwise, there will only be small adjustments.
But if it's more complicated, there will be negotiations for more extensive
changes.
1. On what needs to be done here. (actual blockers)

2. Or what should be in follow-up tickets with a commitment from someone/their
company/library to work on it after these patches make it. (*no blockers* but
very valuable to complete the feature, split in separate ticket to avoid
stalling the the core patches) If it's hard to lock the functional scope, you
could also if possible extract stuff from the current patches to make a minimum
viable product. To avoid a stall.

3. Or just follow-up tickets without a commitment and if someone really wants
an addition or change, then they would need to drive the effort. (to deflect
stuff more suited for a christmas shopping list ^^)

So, the game of balance between avoiding scope creep and avoiding design
choices that would unnecessarily close doors for some workflows.

In the hope that helps getting to accepted, stable, not overblown specs for
this feature.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Koha-bugs mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/

Reply via email to