Hi, On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:11 AM, Robin Sheat <[email protected]> wrote: > Additionally, do we want to split things up within the Koha namespace, > for example database-accessing code vs. the more business logicy stuff? > My personal inclination is to not do that, and it wouldn't be a terrible > refactoring to do at a later stage if it were required.
I'd prefer a separation between business logic and data access, actually. Perhaps # data access - though the choice of naming may better follow whatever pattern DBIx::Class imposes: Koha::DB::biblio Koha::DB::accounts # business logic Koha::Acounts Koha::Cataloging Koha::Cataloging::Biblio or the like. Obviously we could debate the hierarchy ad infinitum, but as long as names are well-chosen and we don't lump unrelated things together, we can run with what works. > Oh, something else that's recommended that I tend to do is not export > anything by default, requiring the module to be included like: > use C4::Accounts qw/ get_users_balance /; > mostly this prevents surprising things getting into your namespace. This > is more a style suggestion though. I agree with Colin that this should be more than just a style suggestion. We shouldn't include more than the bare minimum in @EXPORT; @EXPORT_OK is to be preferred. Even better would be an object oriented design. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton [email protected] _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] 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/
