https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=16895 --- Comment #10 from Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com> --- In retrospect that kind of artificial limit seems silly for an API. There is absolutely no reason to require even a writeoff to be the same amount just because the interface requires it ( for the time being ). It makes more sense for the client to make those decisions. Limit removed! (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #8)
Question raised while testing:
Why does sub pay in C4/SIP/ILS/Transaction/FeePayment.pm contain this check: if ( $fee && $fee->amountoutstanding == $amt ) {
If I am paying a partial amount in the interface, this is allowed too. But note that it is not possible to writeoff a partial amount in the interface. I tried a partial writeoff in testing this patch and I wondered why I got a N in the response. But the cause is this test. I think we should print a message why we refused the payment.
While I understand that you refuse it for a writeoff, I do not understand it for another payment type. And thats where I can tie it to this report: Should this check be applied only to the writeoffs ?
In summary I propose two changes: [1] Send a message why you refuse a partial payment for writeoffs. [2] Accept a partial payment for other types.
Changing status
-- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.