https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=38007 --- Comment #4 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- (In reply to Esther Melander from comment #3)
Thank you Katrin with explaining how the functionality has developed. The workflow described indicates the intent is for the framework to change to default when the record item is received? In this scenario, the framework is saved as default when the record is created.
In my opinion there are 2 major problems to solve if we were to store in ACQ framework from beginning: 1) Data loss: Any field not defined in the ACQ framework will get deleted whenever the record is edited/touched manually or by script. And the ACQ framework Koha is delivered with is very minimal in terms of fields, because so far it's only used as a way to determine how the forms in the acquisition module will look like (items and "order form new" with UseACQFrameworkForBiblioRecords enabled). 2) Item forms: We also really like the way it allows to have different forms for items when ordering and on receive. Forcing libraries to change the framework manually on receive would add a ton of extra clicks and also require cataloguing permissions where now "item edit" is enough. My goal is not to block any change, but I feel it needs some more thought to make sure we don't break existing workflows. If identifying those records is the major issue: Could we use LDR pos. 17 to indicate an incomplete record instead of the framework? Or something else? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.