This bug was due to a difference in field names used in the item data
for items versus patrons. This patch adds a ternary to discern between
the two.
To test:
Before applying patch:
1. Create a batch of patroncards with one duplicate.
2. Run the de-duplication on the batch.
3. Note that all patrons beyond the first in the batch are now
deleted.
After applying patch:
4. Repeat steps 1-2.
5. Note that only the duplicate patron is removed.
Signed-off-by: Chris Nighswonger <cnighswonger@foundations.edu>
Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <oleonard@myacpl.org>
Tested successfully with both patron card batches and label batches.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
Add indentation for readability
Signed-off-by: Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com>
This reverts commit 1f56a04cad.
[RM note: I confirm Chris Nighswonger's testing that shows that
the patch causes regressions, including breaking creating new
label layouts.]
Signed-off-by: Galen Charlton <gmcharlt@gmail.com>
A lot of routines were defaulting to return -1 in error conditions
but calling code was expecting a ref or object
use return with explicit undef (or emptyness in array context)
for these cases. Extended this to cases where return was not tested
( -1 might in some cases be legit data).
Signed-off-by: Chris Nighswonger <cnighswonger@foundations.edu>
Signed-off-by: Galen Charlton <gmcharlt@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 5cf2b78b6f)
[RM note: ... thereby undoing the revert]
A lot of routines were defaulting to return -1 in error conditions
but calling code was expecting a ref or object
use return with explicit undef (or emptyness in array context)
for these cases. Extended this to cases where return was not tested
( -1 might in some cases be legit data).
Signed-off-by: Chris Nighswonger <cnighswonger@foundations.edu>
Signed-off-by: Galen Charlton <gmcharlt@gmail.com>
