https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17015
--- Comment #310 from Joonas Kylmälä <joonas.kylm...@iki.fi> --- (In reply to Blou from comment #309) > We have stopped maintaining the patch as a formal prospect long ago, after > being told there was no need nor interest for it. It is an endeavour, and > maintaining it "proper" is very time consumming. > > > So we maintain it for ourselves and our clients (maybe hoping that maybe one > day the stars will align?), as it is vastly superior to the current > "calendar" in Koha. > > > We tried many splits over the years, following recommendations. Right now > it's mostly for the sake of easy "git apply". I see many people here in the comments interested in these patches, maybe you mean with no interest as in no interest to review? As the motivation and benefits of the patches is not super clear (due to the missing descriptions in patches) I'm thinking that could have played its part here. However, from the first comment on this bug I see that performance seems to be the reason for the work. I'm quite confident that if the patches with proper descriptions were submitted they would move forward or be rejected as another approach to solving the bug would be considered better. Actually what's the bug here? Calendar slow? If so, the bug report title should be changed. For the Calendar slowness there might be other fixes too so those need to be explored and documented. In any case, until the patches are redone so that they could be reviewed may I ask to keep the status in Failed QA so people don't spend unnecessarily time on reviewing this. -- 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/
