http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11077
--- Comment #32 from M. de Rooy <m.de.r...@rijksmuseum.nl> ---
(In reply to M. Tompsett from comment #30)
> Also, my patch depends on his, so should I squash our patches together, and
> get a single sign off? Should I correct mine after he corrects his? This is
> a very weird scenario to have with 3 pieces in 3 vastly different states.
> I'm happy to fix them any which way, but what is the best course of action?
I agree with most changes, including the one where s_userid and q_userid are
compared.
I think the second patch should not be pushed in its current form, although the
third patch resolves the situation.
So I recommend to squash both patches and get a signoff on the new patch.
If you can add a test plan too, go ahead :)
One point remaining: I do not agree with the PKIAuth change in your last patch.
If you do:
+ my $pki_field = C4::Context->preference('AllowPKIAuth') // '';
combined with: || $pki_field ne 'None', what is the result?
An undef in AllowPKIAuth now makes None ne '' so the compare is true. The test
should only be true if AllowPKIAuth is a value not equal to None or empty
string (undef). So leaving it preference // None was correct.
Thanks for your attention to these details!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Koha-bugs mailing list
Koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org
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/
