On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 05:40:42PM -0000, Jason Etheridge wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Some functionality is implemented with org unit settings, but have
> dedicated interfaces for controlling the setting. Two that I can think
> of are ui.hide_copy_editor_fields and
> circ.staff_client.do_not_auto_attempt_print. I believe there are
> others. Trying to edit these from within generic settings editor is
> sub-optimal. Perhaps we should add a boolean to
> config.org_unit_setting_type for hiding (or not even retrieving) certain
> settings within the editor?
Alternatively, we could just avoid fetching any org settings that have
datatype of 'object' or 'array', since (IIRC) they cannot be edited
in the org settings UI anyway. It's less flexible, but is simpler to
implement and may suffice.
-b
--
Bill Erickson
| Senior Software Developer
| phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
| email: <email address hidden>
| web: http://esilibrary.com
| Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 05:40:42PM -0000, Jason Etheridge wrote: copy_editor_ fields and client. do_not_ auto_attempt_ print. I believe there are org_unit_ setting_ type for hiding (or not even retrieving) certain
> Public bug reported:
>
> Some functionality is implemented with org unit settings, but have
> dedicated interfaces for controlling the setting. Two that I can think
> of are ui.hide_
> circ.staff_
> others. Trying to edit these from within generic settings editor is
> sub-optimal. Perhaps we should add a boolean to
> config.
> settings within the editor?
Alternatively, we could just avoid fetching any org settings that have
datatype of 'object' or 'array', since (IIRC) they cannot be edited
in the org settings UI anyway. It's less flexible, but is simpler to
implement and may suffice.
-b
-- esilibrary. com
Bill Erickson
| Senior Software Developer
| phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
| email: <email address hidden>
| web: http://
| Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source