February 2013 - Koha-bugs - lists.koha-community.org

[Bug 5334] New: add explicit foreign key constraints
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 14 Jan '16

14 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5334 Summary: add explicit foreign key constraints Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: HEAD Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: Database AssignedTo: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 There are many tables that lack explicit foreign key relationships to parent tables. For example: * serial (biblionumber, subscriptionid) * subscription (biblionumber) * subscriptionhistory (biblionumber, subscriptionid) * suggestions (suggestedby, managedby, rejectedby) * branch_transfer_limits (toBranch, fromBranch) and many, many others. Explicit foreign keys should be added for several reasons: * to promote better data integrity and to expose cases where the application code makes unwarranted assumptions about the database structure * to allow cascading updates and deletes in some cases * to make it easier for external reporting tools to correctly identify relationships between tables * to make use of an ORM more effective There are some arguments against this: * a complete set of FKs may decrease database speed (on the other hand, the Koha schema already uses a bunch of FKs) There are some implementation details to consider: * the database creation scripts may need some reordering * in some cases, a database update to add an FK may require dealing with rows that do not meet the new constraint. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 12

[Bug 8897] New: Optional GnuPG encryption of outgoing emails
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 14 Jan '16

14 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=8897 Priority: P5 - low Change sponsored?: --- Bug ID: 8897 Assignee: mirko(a)abunchofthings.net Summary: Optional GnuPG encryption of outgoing emails Severity: enhancement Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: mirko(a)abunchofthings.net Hardware: All Status: NEW Version: rel_3_12 Component: Notices Product: Koha Koha should have an option to encrypt outgoing emails with GnuPG. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 52

[Bug 6657] New: Making 999 visible in framework duplicates 999 entry and affects index
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6657 Bug #: 6657 Summary: Making 999 visible in framework duplicates 999 entry and affects index Classification: Unclassified Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: rel_3_6 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P5 Component: Cataloging AssignedTo: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: jwagner(a)ptfs.com QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org CC: ian.walls(a)bywatersolutions.com The 999 field is usually hidden in the frameworks; the 999$c is where Koha stores the biblionumber for the title. If someone edits the framework to make any field of the 999 visible, then any edit to any field of the MARC record results in a duplicate 999 with the biblionumber repeated. This can cause the record to appear twice in the zebra index, and can also make OPAC suppression not work. I have verified this behavior in current development head and several other versions. To replicate, export a title record and check its 999 field. There should only be one. For example: =999 \\$c219$d219 or <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "> <subfield code="c">219</subfield> <subfield code="d">219</subfield> </datafield> Then edit the framework to make any field of the 999 visible, and edit that same record. Make any change to the title, such as adding a 5xx note. Export the record again and check the 999. There will now be two of them, repeating the biblionumber: =999 \\$c219$d219 =999 \\$c219 or <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "> <subfield code="c">219</subfield> <subfield code="d">219</subfield> </datafield> <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "> <subfield code="c">219</subfield> </datafield> Changing the framework field back to hidden and forcing the MARC record back through zebraqueue does not fix the problem. The only fix we've found is to manually remove the extra 999 at the table level, then rebuild indexes. The first solution for the problem is to not set the 999 field as visible in any framework, but since you can't stop people from being adventurous, we also developed a code safeguard. It has not yet been backported from our current development head to the version in our public git repository; when it is, I'll add a link. In the meantime, here are the details of that commit. If the framework allows the biblionumber (999$c) field to be displayed and edited within the MARC editor, then this results in an additional 999$c value being added to the MARC record. This is because the code already pulled the biblionumber from the biblio table. This patch removes the addition of the extra 999$c field, although this field shouldn't really be editable in the first place. diff --git a/C4/Biblio.pm b/C4/Biblio.pm index 2e28f3f..3f61519 100644 --- a/C4/Biblio.pm +++ b/C4/Biblio.pm @@ -1858,13 +1858,13 @@ sub TransformHtmlToMarc { my $record = MARC::Record->new(); my $i=0; my @fields; + my ( $biblionumbertagfield, $biblionumbertagsubfield ) = + &GetMarcFromKohaField( "biblio.biblionumber", '' ); while ($params->[$i]){ # browse all CGI params my $param = $params->[$i]; my $newfield=0; # if we are on biblionumber, store it in the MARC::Record (it may not be in the edited fields) if ($param eq 'biblionumber') { - my ( $biblionumbertagfield, $biblionumbertagsubfield ) = - &GetMarcFromKohaField( "biblio.biblionumber", '' ); if ($biblionumbertagfield < 10) { $newfield = MARC::Field->new( $biblionumbertagfield, @@ -1903,6 +1903,12 @@ sub TransformHtmlToMarc { } else { while(defined $params->[$j] && $params->[$j] =~ /_code_/){ # browse all it's subfield my $inner_param = $params->[$j]; + my $biblionumbertagsubfield_string = "_code_" . $biblionumbertagsubfield . "_"; + if (($tag eq $biblionumbertagfield) && + ($inner_param =~ /$biblionumbertagsubfield_string/)) { + $j += 2; + next; + } if ($newfield){ -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 58

[Bug 5501] New: why is there a 'do not notify' option?
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5501 Summary: why is there a 'do not notify' option? Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: HEAD Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 Component: Patrons AssignedTo: kyle.m.hall(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: nengard(a)gmail.com QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 When looking at the enhanced messages for patrons there is a 'do not notify' option - which is basically the same as not checking any messaging choices - so why do we need that option at all? I recommend removing it since it's confusing. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 16

[Bug 7710] New: multiple holds per title
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7710 Priority: P5 - low Change sponsored?: --- Bug ID: 7710 CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Assignee: kyle.m.hall(a)gmail.com Summary: multiple holds per title QA Contact: koha.sekjal(a)gmail.com Severity: enhancement Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: melia(a)bywatersolutions.com Hardware: All Status: NEW Version: master Component: Circulation Product: Koha Users shall be able to place holds on multiple items attached to a single biblio, subject to two circulation policies (configurable on the branch/item type/patron category level). One policy shall indicate the number of holds that can be placed on items with different enumchron values (different volumes), while another shall indicate the number of holds that can be placed on items with the same enumchron field (different copies). This will allow libraries to allow patrons to place holds on multiple volumes of a title, up to a reasonable limit, while limiting or preventing multiple holds on 'equivalent' copies. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 135

[Bug 8809] New: Cascading Holds
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=8809 Priority: P5 - low Change sponsored?: --- Bug ID: 8809 CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Summary: Cascading Holds Severity: enhancement Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: nengard(a)gmail.com Hardware: All Status: NEW Version: master Component: Hold requests Depends on: 7710 Product: Koha It would be nice once we have the ability to place holds on multiple items attached to one title if the patron could define which item them want first. So if they place holds all of the items attached to a TV series on DVD for example. They want to be able to say I want Disc 1 before Disc 2 and so on. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

1 1

[Bug 7065] New: reserves table needs a primary key
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7065 Bug #: 7065 Summary: reserves table needs a primary key Classification: Unclassified Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: Architecture, internals, and plumbing AssignedTo: ian.walls(a)bywatersolutions.com ReportedBy: ian.walls(a)bywatersolutions.com QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Blocks: 5609 The reserves (and old_reserves) tables desperately need a primary key. reservernumber should be used for consistency sake. This will allow the possibility of multiple holds per biblio/patron combination, and a host of other improvements. This is included in bug 5872, but needs to be broken out into it's own enhancement for independent review. One cavaet: the values must be unique across the union of reserves and old_reserves. While this is easy enough to achieve in a new installation, adding the values into an existing install gets trickier. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 50

[Bug 8038] New: Enable network printing when UsePrintQueues is on
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=8038 Priority: P5 - low Change sponsored?: --- Bug ID: 8038 CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Assignee: kyle.m.hall(a)gmail.com Summary: Enable network printing when UsePrintQueues is on Severity: enhancement Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: srdjan(a)catalyst.net.nz Hardware: All Status: NEW Version: unspecified Component: Circulation Product: Koha Work to be done: * If UsePrintQueues is on send slips to network printer using C4::Print::printslip() and open the print window as a fall back, rather than calling browser print() immediately How to test: * Set UsePrintQueues to No. Issue and transfer slips should be printed from the browser (pop-up), calling browser print() immediately (as it is now). * Set up a print queue on the server (sysadmin help, needs to provide queue name), add it to the printers; select the printer on the "Select Library" screen, or set it as the branch printer * Set UsePrintQueues to Yes. Issue and transfer slips should be printed from the printer queue, browser pop-up should just open and display, without calling browser print() immediately. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 5

[Bug 8034] New: Enable server print queue selection
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=8034 Priority: P5 - low Change sponsored?: --- Bug ID: 8034 CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Assignee: kyle.m.hall(a)gmail.com Summary: Enable server print queue selection Severity: enhancement Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: srdjan(a)catalyst.net.nz Hardware: All Status: NEW Version: unspecified Component: Circulation Product: Koha Re-enable server print queue selection that was disabled due to being disfunctional. Work to be done: * Add system preference UsePrintQueues. Print queue selection will be enabled only if UsePrintQueues is true. * Place admin/printers.pl link on the admin page. Should be visible UsePrintQueues dependent. * Add branches.default_printqueue that will be used if not set in session * Uncomment printer selection in "Set Library". Feature will be visible UsePrintQueues dependent. A follow-up bug will be created for printing using the selection. How to test: * Check that UsePrintQueues syspref is available * When UsePrintQueues is "No", check: - "Printers" link on the "Admin" page is not present - "Set Library" does not have printer selection - branch maintenance does not have default printer queue selection * When UsePrintQueues is "Yes", check: - "Printers" link on the "Admin" page is present - follow the link and add some printer queues - branch maintenance does have default printer queue selection - "Set Library" does have printer selection; select one - selected printer sticks for the session * -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 59

[Bug 5572] New: refinements to function merge sub merge in C4::AuthoritiesMarc
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5572 Summary: refinements to function merge sub merge in C4::AuthoritiesMarc Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: rel_3_2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: MARC Authority data support AssignedTo: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: januszop(a)gmail.com QAContact: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org CC: ian.walls(a)bywatersolutions.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Created attachment 2941 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=2941 Proposed patch When merging/editing authority records bibliographic records are to be corrected. This is done by merge from C4::AuthoritiesMarc. There has been a change in this function from 30 Sept./6 Oct. (commit e9c0a11d41f107425d7f53dcc09e57e3e00ee608) [between 3.2.0 beta and 3.2.0 RC] (http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5264) The original behavior in 3.0 was: when authority has been changed, then in the corresponding fields in the bibliographic records all the subfields of such fields controlled by authority will be dropped and created anew with only subfields which have a value in the authority. The new behavior is much better: in the bibliographic record only subfields which have a value in the authority_to (the new authority) will be changed. BUT what there was a subfield present (with value) in authority (and in bibliographic) and the value is now deleted form authority? It will still stay in all bibliographic, whereas it should not. Hence my proposal: subfields not active in authority framework will be preserved; subfields active in the authority framework (i.e. controlled by this authority type) should be set as in the authority record - either have the value of corresponding subfield in authority or be empty. Regards, Janusz -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 57