SolrJsonWriter, guard marc-specific in record_id_from_context fixes #92 #94
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jrochkind
force-pushed
the
json_writer_marc_guard
branch
from
b034fd6 to
89c9feb
Compare
|
Added check to make sure there's a 001. |
billdueber
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 20, 2015
SolrJsonWriter, guard marc-specific in record_id_from_context fixes #92. Gonna merge this is and throw out a patch release.
|
good call, thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
For now I think this is all we need for #92. Although it really needs a test, since I'm not sure how to use Indexer with non-MARC at all at present, I'm not sure how to write one!
Long-term, I think the right design choice is capability to specify in configuration either a Traject::Indexer sub-class and/or one or more mix-in modules to the Traject::Indexer. The primary use case for that would be different source record types -- which would over-ride methods like
record_id_from_contextin source-type-specific ways but also likely add other macro methods (eg not including notextract_marcbut including other source-type-specific useful macros -- I tried to name all the marc-specific macros with "marc" in them for this reason.Once we went down this path, there'd be a generic Indexer base class that did not have any marc specific stuff (including not mixing in the MARC-specific macros) -- but I'd still want the marc-specific one to be default probably, but that could be debated at the time.
I think it's too early for that now, before we have cowpaths to pave, and I think this very simple change should make it possible for erikhatcher to do the experimentation he wants? @erikhatcher?