Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-31 Thread Benjamin Kalish
I don't think so. I haven't found the pattern for when I an item can't be edited, and it may or not involve parts being assigned, but the solution I've found is to edit it in the XUL client. Changing it's status in XUL seems to "unlock" it, and afterwards we can change it's status in the web

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Kathy Lussier
Hi Ben, Are you referring to the bug where copies cannot be edited after a part has been assigned? If so, that bug has been fixed. https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1739271 Kathy On Wed, Aug 29, 2018, 12:53 PM Benjamin Kalish wrote: > Hopefully this is missing from the webstaffblocker

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Jason Stephenson
I'm +1 to remove. For anyone at CW MARS concerned about that vote, I can always keep the 3.0/3.1 XUL client working by leaving the files in place on the server. Jason

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Blake Henderson
+1 remove -Blake- Conducting Magic MOBIUS

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Andrea Buntz Neiman
dev [mailto: >> open-ils-dev-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf Of *Bill >> Erickson >> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 29, 2018 11:57 AM >> *To:* Public Open-ILS tech discussion < >> OPEN-ILS-DEV@list.georgialibraries.org> >> *Subject:* [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Daniel Wells
s.org] *On Behalf Of *Bill Erickson > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 29, 2018 11:57 AM > *To:* Public Open-ILS tech discussion georgialibraries.org> > *Subject:* [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2 > > > > This is an EXTERNAL e

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Boyer, Jason A
29, 2018 11:57 AM To: Public Open-ILS tech discussion Subject: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2 This is an EXTERNAL email. Exercise caution. DO NOT open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Mike Rylander
I'm +0.5 to removal. Thanks, all. -- Mike Rylander | Executive Director | Equinox Open Library Initiative | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: mi...@equinoxinitiative.org | web: http://equinoxinitiative.org On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 1:09 PM Bill Erickson wrote: > > For the reasons

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Bill Erickson
For the reasons mentioned by Ben and Galen, I am also +1 for removal. I also prefer we remove before bug squashing week so we can get it out of the way, with option to revert later if some new serious problem surfaces. And just to have some skin in the game, between Kyle and I, we will resolve

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Benjamin Kalish
Hopefully this is missing from the webstaffblocker list because it's already been fixed, but I couldn't confirm that on launchpad. We've had an ongoing problem where item status changes made from "Edit Item Attributes" in the web client are not saved, and the only workaround we've found at my

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Ben Shum
One other idea that just popped into my head that we might want to discuss is potentially keeping XUL in Evergreen, but deciding to end all the i18n processes related to it. By now, strings should be relatively static, so template changes should no longer be occurring (though sometimes I've been

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Kathy Lussier
Thank you for that assessment Galen. I'll note that the bugs that gave me the biggest concern were in the small category. The type to selection bug is indeed a big issue, particularly for large consortia who have to navigate through a large list of libraries. But my largest concern are with those

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Galen Charlton
Hi, Here's my classification of the current open bugs tagged as webstaffblocker: Small (i.e., likely can be fixed in two weeks) --- https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1773191 Untranslatable Last Billing Type values

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Ben Shum
I vote "yes" to getting rid of XUL now. >From i18n side of things, we've been working around the problems with running the translation process with our old XUL code by using the older template toolkit set from Ubuntu 14.04. That Ubuntu version is EOL next year April 2019, and I'd rather not have

Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Kathy Lussier
Based on what I know today, I reluctantly vote against removal. There are some bugs in that list with no other current workaround except to use the xul client to perform an action. I would happily change my vote in a couple of weeks if more progress were made on some of the webstaffblockers.

[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

2018-08-29 Thread Bill Erickson
Devs, I'd like to have an informal vote on whether we should remove (well, disable) the XUL client in 3.2. Delaying the decision is complicating the release process. If it's clear which way the wind is blowing, we can set a date for the final vote and patching. Knowing what you know today