As part of the patch associated with bug 6303 the display of patrons returned by a seach has changed from surname, firstname to firstname surname. As that change is not flagged in the commit message or associated bug I assume this was inadvertant. Libraries seeing the newer display are seeing it as a regression
NB See also bug 8427 a problem with sorting the results that may be obscured by this one
Created attachment 11170 [details] [review]
Created attachment 11171 [details] [review]
[SIGNED-OFF] Bug 8514 Restore Patron Name Display Order
Bug 6303 introduced an include file governing patron name display
unfortunately that changed patron display in search result lists and
on the circ screen header. This adds a parameter restroring the
original surname, firstname order, whose absence was perceived
as a loss of functionality
Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <email@example.com>
(In reply to comment #3)
> Created attachment 11171 [details] [review]
> [SIGNED-OFF] Bug 8514 Restore Patron Name Display Order
> Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
patch looks good, passing QA
* 53b4f14 Bug 8514 Restore Patron Name Display Order
- perlcritic-progressive tests... OK
- perl -c syntax tests... OK
- xt/tt_valid.t tests... OK
- xt/author/valid-template.t tests... OK
Pushed to 3.8.x, will be in 3.8.4
QA comment: IIRC, we introduced patron-title to be sure we have a consistent display of the patron everywhere. This patch reintroduces the possibility of having the display inconsistent.
I think it is to let the librarian being able to sort the table by surname, isn't it ?
However, I think it's worth being discussed. 3 option:
* we reintroduce the possibility to be inconsistent
* we switch to surname firstname everywhere
* we keep firstname surname (and discard this patch)
Any other option or anything I misunderstood welcomed !
I think a single consistent format everywhere is not desirable. In the real world our names appear in different formats depending on the context. In lists (e.g. a phonebook) inverted is the norm in singular uses (e.g. addressing a letter, introductions) uninverted form. Forcing all formats to follow one or the other is seen by users as unnatural and disrupting to the work flow. The removal of inverted form from search result lists seriously disrupts the usefulness of those lists for large institutions.
I think I agree with Colin here, you do often want things displayed in different ways depending on context.
Patch pushed to master