https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17519
Marcel de Rooy <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|In Discussion |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #16 from Marcel de Rooy <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #15) > Actually no - I just didn't have the time to write another answer. > > I think this patch makes the behaviour inconsistent. If you can empty out on > editing, but not on adding the item - that will look like a bug. > > The behaviour right now is consistent as the field is forced to be mandatory > and as I said, we rely on this in some contexts - for example in context of > inventory books. > > Maybe we should discuss use cases first? > > Things that come to my mind: > - new books list > - inventory book (electronical, sometimes printed out) > - sorting by accession date in the OPAC > - weeding reports/workflows OK. The current behavior is not really consistent (if you compare with the other date). But in view of its low importance, I would rather close this report now if it disturbs other users too much.. No problem! -- 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/
