http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10869
--- Comment #34 from mathieu saby <[email protected]> --- (In reply to M. de Rooy from comment #33) > (In reply to mathieu saby from comment #32) > > Well, you may be right ;-) > > I thought it was a good thing to have as less parameters as possible, to > > make the code in .pl files more simple. But it was maybe a bad idea, for > > performance reasons. > > The code without this followup was working well (not sure it is still the > > case), and was signed off. Paul failed QA in comment 17, but I answer him in > > comment 19. > > If you think the followup is not needed, I can obsolete it, and put back the > > bug in "Signed off" state. > > I would suggest to combine them, since the followup also includes a unit > test. Are you sure it is the best way to proceed? as the 1st patch was already signed off, I wanted to keep the signoff. Mathieu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://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/
