Summary: | Command line utility to BATCH load borrower pictures based on Cardnumber | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | David Schuster <dschust1> |
Component: | Command-line Utilities | Assignee: | David Schuster <dschust1> |
Status: | RESOLVED LATER | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | dschust1, katrin.fischer, martin.renvoize |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: | ||
Attachments: | command line utility to load borrower pictures |
Description
David Schuster
2012-04-02 03:41:32 UTC
Created attachment 8750 [details] [review] command line utility to load borrower pictures Test instructions to follow Looks like this got lost - I think it will need a bit of work to fit with our current coding guidelines, but moving it to 'needs signoff' for some testing. QA tools say: FAIL misc/cronjobs/loadimages.pl OK critic FAIL forbidden patterns forbidden pattern: tab char (line 152) <snip> etc. etc. forbidden pattern: Koha is now under the GPLv3 license (line 7) FAIL pod at line EOF in file misc/cronjobs/loadimages.pl =over on line 67 without closing =back *** ERROR: =over on line 57 without closing =back I had a quick go at re-basing this and updating it to current code standards but it looks to be allot of work.. the original script doesn't pass the basic perlcritic tests with a number of defined but unused variables and POD errors at least. It also seems to use lots of modules needlessly so probably needs a rethink. Is anyone actually interested in this one, or should we remove it from the queue and mark is as RESOLVED LATER or something similar? (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #4) > I had a quick go at re-basing this and updating it to current code standards > but it looks to be allot of work.. the original script doesn't pass the > basic perlcritic tests with a number of defined but unused variables and POD > errors at least. > > It also seems to use lots of modules needlessly so probably needs a rethink. > > Is anyone actually interested in this one, or should we remove it from the > queue and mark is as RESOLVED LATER or something similar? Another 3 years, no comment. Closing RESOLVED LATER as suggested. |