https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=34032 --- Comment #8 from Emmi Takkinen <emmi.takkinen@koha-suomi.fi> --- (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #5)
$hold->set( { priority => 1, found => undef, waitingdate => undef, expirationdate => $hold->patron_expiration_date, itemnumber => $hold->item_level_hold ? $hold->itemnumber : undef, } )->store({ hold_reverted => 1 });
Currently, only this case triggers part of the condition (that could be simplified to reduce repetition) that leads to calling: $self->_set_default_expirationdate; (Unless both dates are still the same..)
If they are not, why not respect patron_expiration_date?
Because I just realized there is a column called patron_expiration_date. Somehow this has totally slipped from my attention. You're right, if patron_expiration_date exists we should respect it, not generate new one. However, what should we do if patron_expiration_date is in past? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.