Bug 14656

Summary: Delete Bibliographic Records REST API route & permission
Product: Koha Reporter: Olli-Antti Kivilahti <olli-antti.kivilahti>
Component: REST APIAssignee: Galen Charlton <gmcharlt>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE QA Contact:
Severity: enhancement    
Priority: P5 - low CC: jonathan.druart, josef.moravec, lari.taskula, m.de.rooy, tomascohen
Version: Main   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
See Also: https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17371
Change sponsored?: --- Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact: Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Circulation function:
Bug Depends on: 13799    
Bug Blocks:    
Attachments: Bug 14656 - Delete Bibliographic Records REST API route & permission
Bug 14656 - Delete Bibliographic Records REST API route & permission
Bug 14656 - Delete Bibliographic Records REST API route & permission
Bug 14656 - Delete Bibliographic Records REST API - use C4::Biblio instead :(

Description Olli-Antti Kivilahti 2015-08-06 15:36:14 UTC
Adds a new permission 'editcatalogue' => 'delete_catalogue' and changes the
    /cgi-bin/koha/catalogue/detail.pl?biblionumber=??? -view
to use the REST API to delete a Biblio.
Comment 1 Olli-Antti Kivilahti 2015-08-17 12:18:37 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 2 Olli-Antti Kivilahti 2015-08-31 11:45:57 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Olli-Antti Kivilahti 2015-09-03 14:12:58 UTC
Created attachment 42329 [details] [review]
Bug 14656 - Delete Bibliographic Records REST API route & permission
Comment 4 Olli-Antti Kivilahti 2015-09-24 07:17:17 UTC
Created attachment 42834 [details] [review]
Bug 14656 - Delete Bibliographic Records REST API - use C4::Biblio instead :(
Comment 5 Josef Moravec 2016-10-31 08:56:18 UTC
*** Bug 17126 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Josef Moravec 2016-10-31 08:57:15 UTC
Is this ready for signing-off process? What is the test plan?
Comment 7 Tomás Cohen Arazi (tcohen) 2019-05-07 19:24:23 UTC
The endpoint itself is already implemented on bug 15496. The new permission makes sense, but deserves a new report and patch.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 15496 ***