Bug 5543 - Date ISO format wrong separator
Summary: Date ISO format wrong separator
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: I18N/L10N (show other bugs)
Version: 3.6
Hardware: All All
: PATCH-Sent (DO NOT USE) minor
Assignee: Owen Leonard
QA Contact: Bugs List
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-12-27 13:05 UTC by Fridolin Somers
Modified: 2013-12-05 19:59 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Circulation function:

Attachments
Proposed patch (1.18 KB, patch)
2010-12-27 13:07 UTC, Fridolin Somers 		Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Proposed patch updated (generated with git format-patch) (1.64 KB, patch)
2011-04-07 10:03 UTC, Fridolin Somers 		Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Revised fix (4.09 KB, patch)
2011-12-07 17:21 UTC, Owen Leonard 		Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 5543 - Date ISO format wrong separator (4.10 KB, patch)
2011-12-10 09:47 UTC, Chris Cormack 		Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Show Obsolete (3) View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Fridolin Somers 2010-12-27 13:05:51 UTC 
Hie,

In code Dates.pm, iso date format is defined as : 
    iso  => 'yyyy-mm-dd'

But in system preference, iso is displayed as : 'yyyy/mm/dd'.
Same in "date-format.inc".

Regards,
Comment 1 Fridolin Somers 2010-12-27 13:07:16 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 2 Fridolin Somers 2011-04-07 10:03:34 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Owen Leonard 2011-12-07 17:21:30 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 4 Chris Cormack 2011-12-10 09:47:10 UTC 
Created attachment 6697 [details] [review]
Bug 5543 - Date ISO format wrong separator

This patch converts the changes in Fridolyn SOMERS patch
to T:T and adds an update to the database to correct
the description there.

Signed-off-by: Chris Cormack <chrisc@catalyst.net.nz>
Comment 5 Paul Poulain 2011-12-13 13:48:02 UTC 
QA question:

is the updatedatabase really needed for the description? I thought the description in systempreference was now deprecated in favor of the .pref (translatable) file
Comment 6 Owen Leonard 2011-12-13 13:54:10 UTC 
(In reply to comment #5)

> is the updatedatabase really needed for the description?

I wasn't sure myself, but I wanted to be thorough.
Comment 7 Ian Walls 2011-12-21 22:27:09 UTC 
I'm going to say good to Owen's thoroughness on this.  Best to clean up all these little details as soon as we can, rather than assuming they won't be a problem, and being confused later on.

Simple change, marking Passed QA
Comment 8 Paul Poulain 2011-12-27 17:31:37 UTC 
Ian, I feel/fear you've misunderstood my question:
the explanation column in systempreference is now useless. What we use is the description in i18n_l10n.pref (fix that is also included)

So, unless i'm mistaking somewhere, the updatedatabase is strictly useless, and we should have a bug entry for removing the explanation field.
Comment 9 Katrin Fischer 2011-12-27 17:34:41 UTC 
The column is still needed for local use system preferences, but it could be emptied for normal system preferences.
Comment 10 Paul Poulain 2012-01-03 17:08:32 UTC 
OK, katrin you confirm it's useless in this case. i'll push the patch without the updatedatabase stuff then, and open a bug to empty descriptions of sysprefs that are not local (question: how can we identify them ?)
Comment 11 Paul Poulain 2012-01-10 22:31:24 UTC 
Patch pushed, please test

(removed the updatedatabase stuff, that is useless
Comment 12 Jared Camins-Esakov 2012-05-23 12:36:37 UTC 
This will be included in the upcoming 3.6.5 release.