Update MARC21 frameworks to Update Nro. 17 for current installs
Created attachment 21601 [details] [review] Bug 10970 - Update MARC21 frameworks to Update Nr. 17 - DB update Database counterpart of Bug 10962. Updates existing MARC21 default frameworks to Update Nr. 17 (September 2013) To test 1) Apply patch 2) run updatedatabase.pl 3) Verify new subtags biblio 015_q 020_q 024_q 027_q 800_7 810_7 811_7 830_7 authorities 020_q 024_q
Patch applied cleanly, go forth and signoff
Created attachment 22134 [details] [review] Bug 10970 - Update MARC21 frameworks to Update Nr. 17 - DB update Database counterpart of Bug 10962. Updates existing MARC21 default frameworks to Update Nr. 17 (September 2013) To test 1) Apply patch 2) run updatedatabase.pl 3) Verify new subtags biblio 015_q 020_q 024_q 027_q 800_7 810_7 811_7 830_7 authorities 020_q 024_q Signed-off-by: David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> Adds the fields indicated and specified at the LOC website: http://www.loc.gov/marc/status.html
Created attachment 23332 [details] [review] Bug 10970 - Update MARC21 frameworks to Update Nr. 17 - DB update Database counterpart of Bug 10962. Updates existing MARC21 default frameworks to Update Nr. 17 (September 2013) To test 1) Apply patch 2) run updatedatabase.pl 3) Verify new subtags biblio 015_q 020_q 024_q 027_q 800_7 810_7 811_7 830_7 authorities 020_q 024_q Signed-off-by: David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Code looks good to me. No complaints from qa tools. Tested the dbrev. Verified the changes with LOC site. Passed QA Just wondering about two points: How should we get the changes propagated to other frameworks? (Probably most users would like to update them, but indeed some might not.) The Control subfield $7 on 8XX looks like we need a clone of the Leader plugin?
(In reply to M. de Rooy from comment #5) > How should we get the changes propagated to other frameworks? (Probably most > users would like to update them, but indeed some might not.) The work Bernardo started in bug 10963 suggests a way that this might become easier in the future -- once a format-specific stock framework is recast as being a subset of the default framework (+ difference in subfield visibility), it would be easier to let users say, for example, please refresh my SER framework based on the current state of the default framework. > The Control subfield $7 on 8XX looks like we need a clone of the Leader > plugin? That's a good idea, though it would be a smaller version since 8XX$7 has only two positions defined.
Pushed to master. Thanks, Bernardo!
I also pushed to a follow-up to ensure that the update is run only for MARC21 installations.
Patch pushed to 3.14.x, will be in 3.14.2. (Creates update 3.14.01.001)
FWIW, upgrading koha-common from 3.14.01 to 3.14.03 threw the following: Upgrade to 3.14.01.001 done (Bug 10970 - Update MARC21 frameworks to Update Nr. 17 - DB update) DBD::mysql::db do failed: Table 'koha_biblios.collections_tracking' doesn't exist at /usr/share/koha/intranet/cgi-bin/installer/data/mysql/updatedatabase.pl line 7830. It is probably a good idea to trap such errors if they are expected by testing for the existence of the table perior to operating on it.
(In reply to Chris Nighswonger from comment #10) > FWIW, upgrading koha-common from 3.14.01 to 3.14.03 threw the following: > > Upgrade to 3.14.01.001 done (Bug 10970 - Update MARC21 frameworks to Update > Nr. 17 - DB update) > DBD::mysql::db do failed: Table 'koha_biblios.collections_tracking' doesn't > exist at > /usr/share/koha/intranet/cgi-bin/installer/data/mysql/updatedatabase.pl line > 7830. That message belongs to the next db update, for Bug 11384