The order of "use"

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

The order of "use"

Mark Tompsett
Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of
symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts
C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts
C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we
should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The order of "use"

Jonathan Druart
See
  commit ce96080f3005be5a63c9f2cab8d4b6c81e9b5b27
  Bug 21133: Fix use statements order


On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 13:42 Mark Tompsett <[hidden email]> wrote:
Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of
symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts
C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts
C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we
should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The order of "use"

dcook
In reply to this post by Mark Tompsett
Whether or not to prefix the function with "C4::Accounts::" is something we should probably talk about at some point.

Historically, a lot of Koha modules use the "Exporter" module to export their functions into the main namespace of the caller. When "use C4::Accounts" runs, it automatically calls the "import" function in C4::Accounts, which in most/all cases is provided by the Exporter module. Blah blah blah. You can use the syntax "use C4::Accounts qw()" to prevent the importing of any functions or you can selectively import functions with "use C4::Accounts qw(function1 function2)". Fun times...

If you don't automatically import functions into the main namespace of the caller, then you'd want to definitely prefix the function with C4::Accounts::, otherwise you'll get an error since that function would be declared in the main namespace (or worse it's the same function name and you wind up with more errors/unexpected behaviour).

Personally, I rather use object oriented programming like we're trying in the Koha:: modules and/or have function libraries that don't use Exporter and instead require use of full namespace (e.g. C4::Accounts::function1). I think that's just a lot more transparent. More verbose but more explicit and easier to understand. Also fewer changes of function name collisions and less messy main namespace in the caller.

That's my 2 cents.

David Cook
Systems Librarian
Prosentient Systems
72/330 Wattle St
Ultimo, NSW 2007
Australia

Office: 02 9212 0899
Direct: 02 8005 0595

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mark Tompsett
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 3:43 AM
To: Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The order of "use"

Jonathan Druart
"At some point", yes...
Bug 8244 - Script to find exporter problems
Bug 17600 - Standardize the EXPORT

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 20:24 David Cook <[hidden email]> wrote:
Whether or not to prefix the function with "C4::Accounts::" is something we should probably talk about at some point.

Historically, a lot of Koha modules use the "Exporter" module to export their functions into the main namespace of the caller. When "use C4::Accounts" runs, it automatically calls the "import" function in C4::Accounts, which in most/all cases is provided by the Exporter module. Blah blah blah. You can use the syntax "use C4::Accounts qw()" to prevent the importing of any functions or you can selectively import functions with "use C4::Accounts qw(function1 function2)". Fun times...

If you don't automatically import functions into the main namespace of the caller, then you'd want to definitely prefix the function with C4::Accounts::, otherwise you'll get an error since that function would be declared in the main namespace (or worse it's the same function name and you wind up with more errors/unexpected behaviour).

Personally, I rather use object oriented programming like we're trying in the Koha:: modules and/or have function libraries that don't use Exporter and instead require use of full namespace (e.g. C4::Accounts::function1). I think that's just a lot more transparent. More verbose but more explicit and easier to understand. Also fewer changes of function name collisions and less messy main namespace in the caller.

That's my 2 cents.

David Cook
Systems Librarian
Prosentient Systems
72/330 Wattle St
Ultimo, NSW 2007
Australia

Office: <a href="tel:02%2092%2012%2008%2099" value="+33292120899" target="_blank">02 9212 0899
Direct: <a href="tel:02%2080%2005%2005%2095" value="+33280050595" target="_blank">02 8005 0595

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mark Tompsett
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 3:43 AM
To: Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The order of "use"

dcook

I meant on koha-devel, but here we are now.

 

Ahh I see https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17600#c82. It is frustrating when we don’t get the feedback for which we’re hoping.

 

I actually don’t monitor the Koha Bugs List listserv as the volume is just too high(I’m 55,000 emails behind apparently) and I have too much other work to do, so I never even knew about this bug. I’m sure I must not be alone in not monitoring that listserv for that reason? But I guess there are too many issues to have koha-devel threads for everything…

 

Looking at https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_18.11 and https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_19.05, I wonder if we should have “interest groups” or “steering groups”, which could be responsible for providing feedback and guidance on patches for Koha?

 

Looking at the “Component” in Bugzilla, I know I’m interested in all things “Architecture, internals, and plumbing”, “Authentication”, “Cataloging”, “MARC*”, “REST API”, “Searching*”, “Task Scheduler”, “Web Services”, and “Z39.50*”. I’d happily provide feedback on all those topics.

 

Maybe members of “interest groups” could be automatically added to the “CC List” for those components in which they participate? And if we list the members of interest groups, contributors could approach those people directly for feedback/guidance? That might be easier than the process now of emailing koha-devel, saying something in #koha, or opening a Bugzilla issue and hoping that you somehow reach interested people?

 

Honestly, there are many topics in Koha where I don’t really have an opinion. I just want those areas, like circulation, to work and I’m happy for everyone else to take care of them. I’m really interested in the areas I mention above. Mostly relating to data, system design/performance, and interoperability.

 

Anyway, it’s just a thought. I’ll go comment on #17600 in any case ;).

 

David Cook

Systems Librarian

Prosentient Systems

72/330 Wattle St

Ultimo, NSW 2007

Australia

 

Office: 02 9212 0899

Direct: 02 8005 0595

 

From: Jonathan Druart [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 10:49 AM
To: David Cook <[hidden email]>
Cc: Mark Tompsett <[hidden email]>; Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

 

"At some point", yes...

Bug 8244 - Script to find exporter problems

Bug 17600 - Standardize the EXPORT

 

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 20:24 David Cook <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whether or not to prefix the function with "C4::Accounts::" is something we should probably talk about at some point.

Historically, a lot of Koha modules use the "Exporter" module to export their functions into the main namespace of the caller. When "use C4::Accounts" runs, it automatically calls the "import" function in C4::Accounts, which in most/all cases is provided by the Exporter module. Blah blah blah. You can use the syntax "use C4::Accounts qw()" to prevent the importing of any functions or you can selectively import functions with "use C4::Accounts qw(function1 function2)". Fun times...

If you don't automatically import functions into the main namespace of the caller, then you'd want to definitely prefix the function with C4::Accounts::, otherwise you'll get an error since that function would be declared in the main namespace (or worse it's the same function name and you wind up with more errors/unexpected behaviour).

Personally, I rather use object oriented programming like we're trying in the Koha:: modules and/or have function libraries that don't use Exporter and instead require use of full namespace (e.g. C4::Accounts::function1). I think that's just a lot more transparent. More verbose but more explicit and easier to understand. Also fewer changes of function name collisions and less messy main namespace in the caller.

That's my 2 cents.

David Cook
Systems Librarian
Prosentient Systems
72/330 Wattle St
Ultimo, NSW 2007
Australia

Office: <a href="tel:02%2092%2012%2008%2099" target="_blank">02 9212 0899
Direct: <a href="tel:02%2080%2005%2005%2095" target="_blank">02 8005 0595

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mark Tompsett
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 3:43 AM
To: Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The order of "use"

Jonathan Druart
"What's on in koha-devel", #8 and #9 :)

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 21:38 David Cook <[hidden email]> wrote:

I meant on koha-devel, but here we are now.

 

Ahh I see https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17600#c82. It is frustrating when we don’t get the feedback for which we’re hoping.

 

I actually don’t monitor the Koha Bugs List listserv as the volume is just too high(I’m 55,000 emails behind apparently) and I have too much other work to do, so I never even knew about this bug. I’m sure I must not be alone in not monitoring that listserv for that reason? But I guess there are too many issues to have koha-devel threads for everything…

 

Looking at https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_18.11 and https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_19.05, I wonder if we should have “interest groups” or “steering groups”, which could be responsible for providing feedback and guidance on patches for Koha?

 

Looking at the “Component” in Bugzilla, I know I’m interested in all things “Architecture, internals, and plumbing”, “Authentication”, “Cataloging”, “MARC*”, “REST API”, “Searching*”, “Task Scheduler”, “Web Services”, and “Z39.50*”. I’d happily provide feedback on all those topics.

 

Maybe members of “interest groups” could be automatically added to the “CC List” for those components in which they participate? And if we list the members of interest groups, contributors could approach those people directly for feedback/guidance? That might be easier than the process now of emailing koha-devel, saying something in #koha, or opening a Bugzilla issue and hoping that you somehow reach interested people?

 

Honestly, there are many topics in Koha where I don’t really have an opinion. I just want those areas, like circulation, to work and I’m happy for everyone else to take care of them. I’m really interested in the areas I mention above. Mostly relating to data, system design/performance, and interoperability.

 

Anyway, it’s just a thought. I’ll go comment on #17600 in any case ;).

 

David Cook

Systems Librarian

Prosentient Systems

72/330 Wattle St

Ultimo, NSW 2007

Australia

 

Office: <a href="tel:02%2092%2012%2008%2099" value="+33292120899" target="_blank">02 9212 0899

Direct: <a href="tel:02%2080%2005%2005%2095" value="+33280050595" target="_blank">02 8005 0595

 

From: Jonathan Druart [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 10:49 AM
To: David Cook <[hidden email]>
Cc: Mark Tompsett <[hidden email]>; Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

 

"At some point", yes...

Bug 8244 - Script to find exporter problems

Bug 17600 - Standardize the EXPORT

 

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 20:24 David Cook <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whether or not to prefix the function with "C4::Accounts::" is something we should probably talk about at some point.

Historically, a lot of Koha modules use the "Exporter" module to export their functions into the main namespace of the caller. When "use C4::Accounts" runs, it automatically calls the "import" function in C4::Accounts, which in most/all cases is provided by the Exporter module. Blah blah blah. You can use the syntax "use C4::Accounts qw()" to prevent the importing of any functions or you can selectively import functions with "use C4::Accounts qw(function1 function2)". Fun times...

If you don't automatically import functions into the main namespace of the caller, then you'd want to definitely prefix the function with C4::Accounts::, otherwise you'll get an error since that function would be declared in the main namespace (or worse it's the same function name and you wind up with more errors/unexpected behaviour).

Personally, I rather use object oriented programming like we're trying in the Koha:: modules and/or have function libraries that don't use Exporter and instead require use of full namespace (e.g. C4::Accounts::function1). I think that's just a lot more transparent. More verbose but more explicit and easier to understand. Also fewer changes of function name collisions and less messy main namespace in the caller.

That's my 2 cents.

David Cook
Systems Librarian
Prosentient Systems
72/330 Wattle St
Ultimo, NSW 2007
Australia

Office: <a href="tel:02%2092%2012%2008%2099" target="_blank">02 9212 0899
Direct: <a href="tel:02%2080%2005%2005%2095" target="_blank">02 8005 0595

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mark Tompsett
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 3:43 AM
To: Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The order of "use"

dcook

Touché! I’ll endeavour to read those more attentively!

 

I never go to meetings as they don’t work for my timezone, but surely I could read these emails more carefully.

 

David Cook

Systems Librarian

Prosentient Systems

72/330 Wattle St

Ultimo, NSW 2007

Australia

 

Office: 02 9212 0899

Direct: 02 8005 0595

 

From: Jonathan Druart [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 12:13 PM
To: David Cook <[hidden email]>
Cc: Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

 

"What's on in koha-devel", #8 and #9 :)

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 21:38 David Cook <[hidden email]> wrote:

I meant on koha-devel, but here we are now.

 

Ahh I see https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17600#c82. It is frustrating when we don’t get the feedback for which we’re hoping.

 

I actually don’t monitor the Koha Bugs List listserv as the volume is just too high(I’m 55,000 emails behind apparently) and I have too much other work to do, so I never even knew about this bug. I’m sure I must not be alone in not monitoring that listserv for that reason? But I guess there are too many issues to have koha-devel threads for everything…

 

Looking at https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_18.11 and https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_19.05, I wonder if we should have “interest groups” or “steering groups”, which could be responsible for providing feedback and guidance on patches for Koha?

 

Looking at the “Component” in Bugzilla, I know I’m interested in all things “Architecture, internals, and plumbing”, “Authentication”, “Cataloging”, “MARC*”, “REST API”, “Searching*”, “Task Scheduler”, “Web Services”, and “Z39.50*”. I’d happily provide feedback on all those topics.

 

Maybe members of “interest groups” could be automatically added to the “CC List” for those components in which they participate? And if we list the members of interest groups, contributors could approach those people directly for feedback/guidance? That might be easier than the process now of emailing koha-devel, saying something in #koha, or opening a Bugzilla issue and hoping that you somehow reach interested people?

 

Honestly, there are many topics in Koha where I don’t really have an opinion. I just want those areas, like circulation, to work and I’m happy for everyone else to take care of them. I’m really interested in the areas I mention above. Mostly relating to data, system design/performance, and interoperability.

 

Anyway, it’s just a thought. I’ll go comment on #17600 in any case ;).

 

David Cook

Systems Librarian

Prosentient Systems

72/330 Wattle St

Ultimo, NSW 2007

Australia

 

Office: <a href="tel:02%2092%2012%2008%2099" target="_blank">02 9212 0899

Direct: <a href="tel:02%2080%2005%2005%2095" target="_blank">02 8005 0595

 

From: Jonathan Druart [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 10:49 AM
To: David Cook <[hidden email]>
Cc: Mark Tompsett <[hidden email]>; Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

 

"At some point", yes...

Bug 8244 - Script to find exporter problems

Bug 17600 - Standardize the EXPORT

 

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 20:24 David Cook <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whether or not to prefix the function with "C4::Accounts::" is something we should probably talk about at some point.

Historically, a lot of Koha modules use the "Exporter" module to export their functions into the main namespace of the caller. When "use C4::Accounts" runs, it automatically calls the "import" function in C4::Accounts, which in most/all cases is provided by the Exporter module. Blah blah blah. You can use the syntax "use C4::Accounts qw()" to prevent the importing of any functions or you can selectively import functions with "use C4::Accounts qw(function1 function2)". Fun times...

If you don't automatically import functions into the main namespace of the caller, then you'd want to definitely prefix the function with C4::Accounts::, otherwise you'll get an error since that function would be declared in the main namespace (or worse it's the same function name and you wind up with more errors/unexpected behaviour).

Personally, I rather use object oriented programming like we're trying in the Koha:: modules and/or have function libraries that don't use Exporter and instead require use of full namespace (e.g. C4::Accounts::function1). I think that's just a lot more transparent. More verbose but more explicit and easier to understand. Also fewer changes of function name collisions and less messy main namespace in the caller.

That's my 2 cents.

David Cook
Systems Librarian
Prosentient Systems
72/330 Wattle St
Ultimo, NSW 2007
Australia

Office: <a href="tel:02%2092%2012%2008%2099" target="_blank">02 9212 0899
Direct: <a href="tel:02%2080%2005%2005%2095" target="_blank">02 8005 0595

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mark Tompsett
Sent: Thursday, 25 October 2018 3:43 AM
To: Koha-devel <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Koha-devel] The order of "use"

Greetings,

I was looking at bug 21641, and noticed the patch was explicitly stating
C4::Accounts:: on the function in question. I vaguely recalled this sort of symptom shows itself in a knotted “use” mess.

C4::Circulation –> C4::Members –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Accounts C4::Circulation –> C4::Overdues –> C4::Accounts

What is the best order to list these? C4::Accounts last?
Is putting the C4::Accounts:: on the function in question still something we should do anyways?

Feedback appreciated,
Mark Tompsett

_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/


_______________________________________________
Koha-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
website : http://www.koha-community.org/
git : http://git.koha-community.org/
bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/