Bug 9412 - add optional_params to C4::Service
Summary: add optional_params to C4::Service
Status: Failed QA
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Architecture, internals, and plumbing (show other bugs)
Version: master
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Hugh Davenport
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on: 4437
Blocks: 4439
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2013-01-17 05:15 UTC by Hugh Davenport
Modified: 2016-08-22 08:38 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: Small patch
Who signed the patch off:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments
bug 9412 Add optional_params sub to C4::Service (1.27 KB, patch)
2013-01-17 05:17 UTC, Hugh Davenport
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Hugh Davenport 2013-01-17 05:15:30 UTC
Adds a sub to allow getting parameters that aren't required, but may be sent
Comment 1 Hugh Davenport 2013-01-17 05:17:22 UTC
Created attachment 14651 [details] [review]
bug 9412 Add optional_params sub to C4::Service

Similar to require_params, but just returns undef for any param that
wasn't sent by request

Signed-off-by: Hugh Davenport <hugh@davenport.net.nz>
Comment 2 Bernardo Gonzalez Kriegel 2013-02-19 03:30:15 UTC
Self-signed
Comment 3 Kyle M Hall 2013-04-12 15:39:36 UTC
I think this needs a test plan.
Comment 4 Kyle M Hall 2013-07-05 14:17:58 UTC
Failed QA for the following reasons:
1) No test plan
2) Adds a subroutine that is not used

Can you please justify the addition of this new subroutine when it isn't used by any new code?
Comment 5 Hugh Davenport 2013-07-05 21:02:50 UTC
Hi Kyle,

Sorry, when I git bz'd the patch up here, it didn't take into account dependencies which I guess I kinda assumed it would. This bug is actually building blocks for bug 4439 which then use this method. I've updated this bug to show this dependency.

Cheers,

Hugh
Comment 6 Marc Véron 2016-08-22 08:38:05 UTC
Still valid?