https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=33997
--- Comment #14 from Nick Clemens <n...@bywatersolutions.com> --- (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #12) > I still think that if we need a specific timestamp for selected changes, > than we should add a new field for that. > And leave updated_on to what it is or even should be ? (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #10) > We have more and more customers using the REST API's and the 'updated_on' > field is consistently presumed to actually signify a change to the patrons > record... filtering upon it and finding you're results include lots and lots > of records where no change has really taken place is both a performance > issue and a confusion for end users of the API's. I started out agreeing with Martin, but now agree with Marcel. We should maybe have an 'edited_on' field for "changes" to the record If 'updated_on' is used for syncing to outside systems, and those systems use lastseen then they will want to update those patrons - e.g. an outside email service for contacting only recently active patrons, or one that does stats for a library on 'active' patrons - we wouldn't capture patrons active only on overdrive or other services if we don't see a patron as having been 'updated' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org 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/