https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=32444 Bug ID: 32444 Summary: Identify patrons as a group or family unit Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: master Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 - low Component: Patrons Assignee: koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org Reporter: cbrannon@cdalibrary.org QA Contact: testopia@bugs.koha-community.org CC: gmcharlt@gmail.com, kyle.m.hall@gmail.com For years, Koha has used guarantors to link families together. Progress was made when we were able to link more than one person to a child. However, there are other areas where it might be beneficial to link patrons together that don't involve parents. https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=31329 proposes to block linked accounts when one is restricted. But before we do that, I think it might be worth looking at the guarantors a little bit and refine our approach with this functionality before proceeding with 31329 (sorry Wally!). I think guarantors should be updated to something more universal, linking any patron to any patron. Right now we limit it to linking a parent or guardian to a child. But what if we wanted to link a household. That might just be siblings in the same house. What if it was husband and wife? What if it was an organization? There are some great ideas with linked accounts, like what 31329 proposes. And I am sure that there are others. For example, maybe your library has some resources that you want to limit 1 per household. Right now we can't do that, but perhaps we could with a re-imagined linking system. What if we wanted to update information in the linked accounts? This would be a good start. What does this re-imagined linking look like? Perhaps: * Eliminate the limitation allowing the links to just child accounts. * Name the organizational grouping: Household, School name, business name, etc. * Identify and an all guarantors in the grouping. * Can the grouping exist without a guarantor? * If not, if the last guarantor is removed from the group, should someone else in the grouping be marked as guarantor, should the grouping be allowed to carry on without a guarantor, or should the grouping be dissolved? There may be other aspects we might want to consider in this functionality, but this is a good start. Once this is reworked, then we could look at options of linking blocks to particular groups, updating groups, circulation limitations to groups, etc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.