February 2019 - Koha-bugs - lists.koha-community.org

[Bug 7088] Cannot renew items on hold even with override
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 20 Feb '19

20 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7088 --- Comment #30 from Andrew Isherwood <andrew.isherwood(a)ptfs-europe.com> --- Thanks for the feedback regarding the pref Katrin, good spot, I'd completely missed that, I'll create a patch to sort it out shortly. As far as the second date selector for on hold due dates is concerned, it may be useful to know that this development was specced and has been accepted by three of our customers, all of whom comprise librarians, they are all happy with a second date selector that only appears when an on hold item is selected for renewal. I'll try and get them to comment on this bug if that would be helpful. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 14576] Allow automatic update of location on checkin
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 20 Feb '19

20 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14576 --- Comment #99 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer(a)bsz-bw.de> --- Starting another round of review with reading code and comments: 1) This example in the system preference is wrong (appears in a few spots): E.g. ''PROC: FIC'' will cause an item that was set to ''Book Cart'' Should e: CART: FIC 2) Missing dot, also: PROC not? Items in the CART location will be returned to their permanent location on checkout 3) Use <b> instead of ** to highlight: **Use of an _ALL_ rule will override/ignore any other values** 4) Not really about this patch, but stil trying to see how it all fits together: NewItemsDefaultLocation referst to the cart_to_shelf cronjob, but I think this might be incorrect. I will continue testing, just some first notes and all easy to fix! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 7088] Cannot renew items on hold even with override
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 20 Feb '19

20 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7088 Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer(a)bsz-bw.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Signed Off |Failed QA CC| |oleonard(a)myacpl.org, | |wizzyrea(a)gmail.com --- Comment #29 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer(a)bsz-bw.de> --- Hi Andrew, I think we need to work on the visibility of the checkbox and maybe the logic of triggering things with it now (sorry, I think that makes things a bit more complicated: <fieldset class="action"> [% IF ( CAN_user_circulate_override_renewals ) %] [% IF CAN_user_circulate_override_renewals && Koha.Preference( 'AllowRenewalLimitOverride' ) %] - <label for="override_limit">Override renewal limit:</label> + <label for="override_limit">Override renewal restrictions:</label> You will want to add your new pref there with an OR condition there I think Another option might be to have && and a separate label if only hold override is allowed? I am still not sure about the second date box - I'd like to get some opinions on it. Adding Owen and Liz for now, but looking for any librarians opinion really. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 12759] Add ability to pass list contents to batch record modification/deletion tools
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 20 Feb '19

20 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=12759 David Cook <dcook(a)prosentient.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dcook(a)prosentient.com.au -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 7811] borrowers.borrowernumber should be a foreign key for 8 tables
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 20 Feb '19

20 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7811 David Cook <dcook(a)prosentient.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dcook(a)prosentient.com.au -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 6349] auto print hold slip
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6349 Lisette Scheer <lisetteslatah(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Lisette Scheer <lisetteslatah(a)gmail.com> --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 18383 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 18383] New: items.onloan schema comment seems to be incorrect.
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=18383 Bug ID: 18383 Summary: items.onloan schema comment seems to be incorrect. Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: 16.11 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 - low Component: Database Assignee: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Reporter: pongtawat(a)punsarn.asia QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org Currently the items.onloan schema comment (in SQL and hence on schema.koha-community.org too) is like this: defines if item is checked out (NULL for not checked out, and checkout date for checked out) However, on my installation (16.11.06), the date that Koha put into items.onloan column seems to be due date. So, probably the comment should be changed to: defines if item is checked out (NULL for not checked out, and due date for checked out) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 12

[Bug 11897] Stock Rotation for Koha
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11897 --- Comment #372 from Lisette Scheer <lisetteslatah(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #371) > Must admit, my recollection of this code is somewhat vague... But, I believe > the combination of home branch with the date fields prevents that particular > issue. However, it would be nice to have a test to prove that hypothesis.. > might be worth opening another bug for that? Martin, I have opened bug 22373 asking for a test to prove it. Lisette -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 11897] Stock Rotation for Koha
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11897 Lisette Scheer <lisetteslatah(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |22373 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22373 [Bug 22373] Stock Rotation duration test -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0

[Bug 11897] Stock Rotation for Koha
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11897 --- Comment #371 from Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize(a)ptfs-europe.com> --- Must admit, my recollection of this code is somewhat vague... But, I believe the combination of home branch with the date fields prevents that particular issue. However, it would be nice to have a test to prove that hypothesis.. might be worth opening another bug for that? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 0