December 2008 - Koha-bugs - lists.koha-community.org

[Bug 2864] rss/rss.pl broken
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 17 Dec '08

17 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2864 galen.charlton(a)liblime.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- Comment #2 from galen.charlton(a)liblime.com 2008-12-17 06:06 ------- Pushed patch to 3.1. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2837] Descending sort doesn't descend on the overdues report plus other probs with report
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 17 Dec '08

17 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2837 ------- Comment #1 from rick(a)praxis.com.au 2008-12-16 23:12 ------- Rick W wrote: > 1. The following sort options sort in ASCENDING, not DESCENDING order in the overdues report: > 2. The following sort option appears twice. Perhaps the second occurrence should have "desc" appended to it: > 3. The following Filter settings are not remembered from one invocation to the next and have to be remembered and re-entered each time: > 4. The following filter does not seem to work and returns no matches: All of the above have been fixed. The fixes will be submitted with the patch for the enhancements provided in Bug 2866, http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2866 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2866] Filtering and sorting the overdue report using patron attributes
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 17 Dec '08

17 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2866 ------- Comment #2 from rick(a)praxis.com.au 2008-12-16 23:08 ------- Created an attachment (id=567) --> (http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=567&action=view) add an index on the lib column to the authorisedvalues table CREATE INDEX lib ON authorised_values (lib); ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2866] Filtering and sorting the overdue report using patron attributes
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 17 Dec '08

17 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2866 ------- Comment #1 from rick(a)praxis.com.au 2008-12-16 23:06 ------- Created an attachment (id=566) --> (http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=566&action=view) add new sys pref FilterBeforeOverdueReport to the systempreferences table INSERT INTO systempreferences VALUES \ ('FilterBeforeOverdueReport', 0, '', 'Do not run Overdue Report until filter selected', 'YesNo'); ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2866] New: Filtering and sorting the overdue report using patron attributes
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 17 Dec '08

17 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2866 Summary: Filtering and sorting the overdue report using patron attributes Product: Koha Version: HEAD Platform: All URL: /cgi-bin/koha/circ/overdue.pl OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: Circulation AssignedTo: galen.charlton(a)liblime.com ReportedBy: rick(a)praxis.com.au QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha.org A request has been made to enhance the existing Overdues Report. 1. Create a new system preference “FilterBeforeOverdueReport” 2. Option to filter *before* the overdue report runs, avoiding report slowness 3. Add searchable patron attributes to the list of overdue report filters 4. Add searchable patron attributes to the sort fields on the overdue report 5. Display searchable patron attributes on the overdue report This request is related to but not dependent upon the following bug: 2837 Descending sort doesn't descend on the overdues report plus other probs with report The implementation of this request requires two database changes, which are attached to this ticket. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2865] Acquisitions: GST not calculating correctly.
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 16 Dec '08

16 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2865 nicole.engard(a)liblime.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicole.engard(a)liblime.com ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2865] New: Acquisitions: GST not calculating correctly.
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 16 Dec '08

16 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2865 Summary: Acquisitions: GST not calculating correctly. Product: Koha Version: rel_3_0 Platform: PC OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: Acquisitions AssignedTo: rch(a)liblime.com ReportedBy: jransom(a)library.org.nz QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha.org CC: jransom(a)library.org.nz I have just placed an order for a book in my new Koha 3.0 test site. The supplier profile is set with list/ordering price and invoice price both inclusive of GST (12.5%) The supplier gives a 15% discount. I ordered a book with a List price of $75. The amount to be deducted from the budget needs to be exclusive of GST and discount ie the actual net cost to us of purchasing the item. So RRP $75 less GST (divided by 1.125) = a GST exclusive price of $66.66. Then if we deduct the 15% ($9.99) off the ex-GST price the book is actually $56.67. What appears to be happening is that Koha 3.0 then adds GST of 12.5% ($7.08) back on to the $56.67 to arrive at the $63.75 which is then deducted off the budget. This is the wrong amount. It should be $56.67 that is committed from the budget. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2691] call number split failing in come cases
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 16 Dec '08

16 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2691 ------- Comment #3 from nicole.engard(a)liblime.com 2008-12-16 11:19 ------- This from a cataloger who uses LC: The LC Shelflisting Manual had some guidance on formatting call numbers. I think there are often local variations. I don't know about DDC. You might want to post this to AUTOCAT also. Here's a website with some of the LC Shelflisting Manual: http://staff.library.mun.ca/staff/toolbox/shelflst.htm It was recently updated and combined with the classification manual: http://www.loc.gov/cds/classif.html#csm Library of Congress examples copy and pasted from Shelflisting Manual: BJ466 .S7 1986 Copy 1 BJ466 .S7 1986 Copy 2 BJ319 .A46 1989 Copy 1 Asian Japan BJ455 .B3S6 1986 vol.3 Copy 2 MRR Alc BJ455 .B3S6 1986 Suppl. Copy 3 Sci RR When volume numbering is necessary, use the abbreviated English designations vol., pt., and no. for volume, part, and number (cf. G 615). You can see that here we did not follow LC exactly. We drop the numeric portion of the class number, for example: BJ 466 .S7 1986 Copy 1 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2691] call number split failing in come cases
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 16 Dec '08

16 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2691 ------- Comment #2 from nicole.engard(a)liblime.com 2008-12-16 10:37 ------- I don't know if any of these are authoritative, but here are some docs I found: http://library.uww.edu/guides/ddc.html http://www.maag.ysu.edu/techsvs/cat/procman/CP100.htm http://unicorn.bccls.org/Helps/3.1/Workflows/English/Topics/Splitting_Call_… ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0

[Bug 2691] call number split failing in come cases
by bugzilla-daemon＠pippin.metavore.com 16 Dec '08

16 Dec '08

http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2691 ------- Comment #1 from joe.atzberger(a)liblime.com 2008-12-16 10:30 ------- We need to reference an authoritative set of rules for how LCCN and DDC should split, to avoid misconception of intended operation. A link here would be great... ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

1 0