https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=43391
--- Comment #16 from David Cook <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi (tcohen) from comment #15) > (In reply to David Cook from comment #13) > > Hmm I don't know about this as a solution... surely we don't want to be > > adding POD for private functions? > > There's a way fr the POD checker library we use to skip internal methods... > Honestly, I'd ask an LLM to add meaningful POD... Didn't do it to avoid > discussions about it. No worries. I think initially I was blindsided by the change, and couldn't really think of examples of seeing is out in the wild in industry, but then I started thinking about it some more today... and often the most complexity for Koha code can be in these private/internal functions, so I think I was wrong, and I think it's probably a good idea to add POD for new private/internal subs and where possible to add it for existing ones if the QA tool flags it (but only if you understand what it's actually doing). I'd hoped to have a chat at the dev meeting tonight about it, but I think my body isn't quite up to the challenge this time, I'm afraid. My apologies! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
