August 2025 - Koha-bugs - lists.koha-community.org

[Bug 33276] New: Library limitations will cause data loss when editing serials
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 03 Sep '26

03 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=33276 Bug ID: 33276 Summary: Library limitations will cause data loss when editing serials Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: master Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: Serials Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Reporter: thibaud.guillot(a)biblibre.com QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org Hello @ll, This bug can be related to 31422 and 32748. That's the same behavior on "Locations" dropdown list for serials. When a value is limited to a library if we're logging with a patron from another lib, the location value is empty and can be replaced. I copied the same logic as the submitted patch for 32748. We can modify the value but the current value (provides from another lib) stay in dropdown. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

1 14

[Bug 40714] New: cookieConsent: current approach arguable on public computers or shared devices
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 03 Sep '26

03 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40714 Bug ID: 40714 Summary: cookieConsent: current approach arguable on public computers or shared devices Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: Main Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: OPAC Assignee: oleonard(a)myacpl.org Reporter: m.de.rooy(a)rijksmuseum.nl QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org Since we just save a simple key in localStorage, this may still be active on public computers for the next user of that computer? Unless they have separate guest accounts, or cookies and localStorage are cleared when the browser exits. Should we make a difference between browsing anonymous or logging in to Koha within this context of public computers? If so, we might need to save data in the db instead of locally? Looks like this report is less clear than the two others (40712 and 40713). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 2

[Bug 40713] New: cookieConsent: key should have an expiration date
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 03 Sep '26

03 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40713 Bug ID: 40713 Summary: cookieConsent: key should have an expiration date Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: Main Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: OPAC Assignee: oleonard(a)myacpl.org Reporter: m.de.rooy(a)rijksmuseum.nl QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org Currently, the created localStorage key cookieConsent does not expire. This needs adjustment in view of following information: "The GDPR does not specify a fixed time limit for cookie expiry; instead, the duration must be proportionate to the cookie's purpose and never exceed 12 months according to the ePrivacy Directive, which requires consent renewal at least annually, and potentially more frequently based on your local Data Protection Authority's (DPA) guidelines, like the six-month recommendations from the Irish DPC and French CNIL." -- See e.g. https://gdpr.eu/cookies/ "If you use a cookie to store a record that a user has given consent to the use of cookies, you should ask the user to reaffirm their consent no longer than six months [*] after you have stored this consent state. (Footnote: While the legislation does not prescribe a specific lifespan for such cookies, based on a first-principles analysis by the DPC, we consider this to be the appropriate default outer timeframe for storing the user’s consent state. A controller would need to objectively and on a case-by-case basis justify storage for a longer period.)" -- Data Protection Commission [Ireland] Since localStorage has no expiration mechanism itself, we could simply add e.g. a unix timestamp as value here. Since the key now contains empty string and is tested for null to check status. This check would become: does the key exist and is its value still in future? A reject removes the key or clears it. Would it be possible to add the expiry period to a preference or enclosed in CookieConsentedJS somehow? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 3

[Bug 40712] New: cookieConsent: Accepting essential cookies is unneeded/misleading
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 03 Sep '26

03 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40712 Bug ID: 40712 Summary: cookieConsent: Accepting essential cookies is unneeded/misleading Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: Main Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: OPAC Assignee: oleonard(a)myacpl.org Reporter: m.de.rooy(a)rijksmuseum.nl QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org It feels a bit strange to Accept essential cookies. If you dont accept, they work anyway. And if you can accept, you would expect a reject either. But you cant reject them: they are essential and the code just uses them. If there are no additional non-essential cookies, it feels like the bar just needs a OK button to dismiss a message that there are only essential cookies. (This dismissal is not an accept.) "Under GDPR, essential (or strictly necessary) cookies are exempt from requiring user consent because they are fundamental for basic website functionality." -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 2

[Bug 37680] New: inconsistencies with the search results when selecting the "Limit to records with available items" option
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 02 Sep '26

02 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=37680 Bug ID: 37680 Summary: inconsistencies with the search results when selecting the "Limit to records with available items" option Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: Main Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: Searching Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Reporter: hammat.wele(a)inlibro.com QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org There seem to be inconsistencies with the search results when selecting the "Limit to records with available items" option, when we have a notice with two items if the first item is «notforloan» and the second is «notforloan» too or «withdrawn» the notice is still available. And these conditions also are showing : Case : 1- Record with first item as «notforloan» - The second is «notforloan» 2- Record with first item as «notforloan» - The second is «withdrawn» 3- Record with first item as «itemlost» - The second is «notforloan» 4- Record with first item as «itemlost» - The second is «withdrawn» 5- Record with first item «onloan» - The second is «notforloan» 6- Record with first item «onloan» - The second is «withdrawn» To reproduce: 1. Catalog a new record (record test 1) 1.1. Go to Cataloging 1.2. Click New record 1.3. Fill out the mandatory fields (000, 003, 005, 008, 040$c, 245$a, 942$c) 1.4. Click Save (No need to add an item) 1.5. Add two items, set a negative notforloan (ordered) for the two items 2. Repeat step 1, by creating a record (record test 2) with two items one negative notforloan item and the second as «withdrawn» item 3. Repeat step 1, and creating all the record in «Case» section 4. Go to the Opac and search for the created record 5. Click on «Limit to records with available items» ----> All the created items is still showing -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

1 42

[Bug 34488] New: Import default framework
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 02 Sep '26

02 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=34488 Bug ID: 34488 Summary: Import default framework Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: 23.05 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 - low Component: System Administration Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Reporter: viliam.polonec(a)snk.sk QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com I am testing 23.05.01 version, so we can update our production ILS. I found that I can't import default framework for bibliographic records. I tried export it and import. But with no success. KOHA shows MARC Framework for default MARC framework Create framework for () using selector with frameworks After that nothings changed I test it on two different instalations. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

1 8

[Bug 24807] New: Add "year" type to improve sorting by publication date
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 02 Sep '26

02 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=24807 Bug ID: 24807 Summary: Add "year" type to improve sorting by publication date Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: master Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: Searching - Elasticsearch Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Reporter: glasklas(a)gmail.com When sorting on date-of-publication (a year, field 008, positions 7-10), the current behavior when the field contains an invalid year (containing word characters like "uuuu" or just whitespace), these results appear first when sorting in descending order. Invalid values like these should really not be indexed at all. If so (having null values instead) they will always appear last when sorting, regardless of sort order. This fix adds a "year" search field type, that will reject any non-year values, resulting in a more user friendly sorting behavior. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

1 70

[Bug 23333] New: Course Reserves: Instuctor search box positioning
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 02 Sep '26

02 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=23333 Bug ID: 23333 Summary: Course Reserves: Instuctor search box positioning Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: master Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: Staff Client Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Reporter: claire_gravely(a)hotmail.com QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org CC: gmcharlt(a)gmail.com Created attachment 91567 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=91567&action=ed… Screenshot When creating a new course in the course reserves module the "Instructor search" box is oddly positioned. Perhaps it could be moved more in line with 'Instructors'. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

1 4

[Bug 22456] New: Customers Cancelling their Pending Holds
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 02 Sep '26

02 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22456 Bug ID: 22456 Summary: Customers Cancelling their Pending Holds Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: 18.05 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: OPAC Assignee: oleonard(a)myacpl.org Reporter: christofer.zorn(a)ajaxlibrary.ca QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org Target Milestone: --- Good morning! I'm not sure if I should have piggybacked this off of the previous ticket, but I'd like to open the discussion on bug 18856 again. We'd like the ability to have patrons cancel their holds once they have been pulled by staff and are awaiting pick up. Our previous catalogue (Bibliocommons) allowed the cancellation of holds once it as captured. This feature was well like and used by our patrons who had determined they didn't need/want the item any longer. This gave the perception that they were freeing up the item for the next person. We have fielded a number of grumpy comments since our migration about the inability to perform this functionality. >From my perspective, if we're allowing patrons to place holds and cancel them before they're captured, we should offer the ability to cancel them up until they're picked up. At the very least, this should be a system option to allow the Library to choose whether they'd like to enable this functionality. Even if the implemented functionality is a placebo for the user ... offer them the ability to cancel the hold and have it remove from their account. As long as optically it appears they've cancelled the hold, there is no harm. If desired, a report could be run to allow staff to pull those items from the shelf if needed. I'm more than happy to elaborate if needed on this, but I feel that this is a feature that is currently missing from Koha that would be a boon to customer service. Thanks Christofer -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 166

[Bug 39820] New: Items with hold cancellation requests should have the hold cancelled when checked in via SIP
by bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org 02 Sep '26

02 Sep '26

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=39820 Bug ID: 39820 Summary: Items with hold cancellation requests should have the hold cancelled when checked in via SIP Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: Main Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 - low Component: SIP2 Assignee: koha-bugs(a)lists.koha-community.org Reporter: lucas(a)bywatersolutions.com QA Contact: testopia(a)bugs.koha-community.org To recreate: 1. In circ rules set a Default waiting hold cancellation policy to allow hold cancellation requests. 2. Add a hold for a patron and create a hold cancellation request. 3. Check the item in via SIP, I used the SIP emulator: kohadevbox/koha/misc/sip_cli_emulator.pl -a localhost -p 6001 -l MPL -su term1 -sp term1 -m checkin --patron 23529000035676 --item 39999000001310 4. The hold remains. In the staff client if I check in an item with a hold cancellation request the hold is cancelled -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.

1 30