[Bug 11122] New: publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Bug ID: 11122 Summary: publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders Change sponsored?: --- Product: Koha Version: master Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 - low Component: Acquisitions Assignee: koha-bugs@lists.koha-community.org Reporter: fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com QA Contact: testopia@bugs.koha-community.org In acquisition, several templates try to display publisher code and publication year : invoice.tt, parcel.tt, transferorder.tt. Thoses pages use C4::Acquisition methods GetPendingOrders or GetInvoiceDetails. The bug is that in the SQL query of those methods, biblioitems.publishercode and biblioitems.publicationyear. In uncertainprice.pl those datas are fetch using GetBiblioData. It whould be better to fetch them in GetPendingOrders and GetInvoiceDetails. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolyn SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |Needs Signoff Assignee|koha-bugs@lists.koha-commun |fridolyn.somers@biblibre.co |ity.org |m --- Comment #1 from Fridolyn SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 22306 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=22306&action=edit Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders See commit message -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 I'm just a bot <gitbot@bugs.koha-community.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gitbot@bugs.koha-community. | |org When did the bot| |2013-10-30 last check this| | --- Comment #2 from I'm just a bot <gitbot@bugs.koha-community.org> --- Patch applied cleanly, go forth and signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #3 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 23227 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=23227&action=edit Bug 11242: fix opac-MARCdetail.pl display and warnings This patch improves the public catalog MARC view display of records that contain subfields that are not defined in the framework used by the bib record. To test: (RM note: it may be easier to find or create a MARC record that contains a subfield not present in the default framework, then load it, rather than fiddle with the MARC frameworks in your test database.) BACK UP YOUR DATABASE! 1) Search for an item in OPAC 2) Open OPAC detail 3) Click 'MARC View' link 4) Look for something with multiple lines (e.g. 260 or 942) 5) In another tab, Go to staff client and log in 6) Go to the staff client URL similar to: /cgi-bin/koha/catalogue/detail.pl?biblionumber=##### page where ##### is the biblionumber. 7) Edit -> record 8) Note the framework used. 9) More -> Administration 10) MARC bibliographic frameworks 11) Click 'MARC structure' for the framework used by the item shown in OPAC. 12) Find the tag (e.g. 260 or 942) and click 'Subfields' 13) Delete of the matching subfields (e.g. 260$b) shown in the OPAC tab 14) Clear your opac error log. 15) Refresh OPAC tab. The tag subfields are split. 16) There are opac-MARCdetail.pl warnings. 17) Apply patch 18) Clear your opac error log. 19) Refresh OPAC tab. The tag subfields are no longer split strangely. 20) There are no opac-MARCdetail.pl warnings. RESTORE YOUR DATABASE. This also silences a series of warnings triggered by catching undef hash references. Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <oleonard@myacpl.org> Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com> Signed-off-by: Galen Charlton <gmc@esilibrary.com> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolin SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #23227|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #4 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> --- Comment on attachment 23227 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=23227 Bug 11242: fix opac-MARCdetail.pl display and warnings Error, sorry I was experimenting git-bz. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolin SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Patch complexity|--- |Small patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 mathieu saby <mathieu.saby@univ-rennes2.fr> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mathieu.saby@univ-rennes2.f | |r --- Comment #5 from mathieu saby <mathieu.saby@univ-rennes2.fr> --- (In reply to Fridolin SOMERS from comment #0)
In acquisition, several templates try to display publisher code and publication year : invoice.tt, parcel.tt, transferorder.tt. Thoses pages use C4::Acquisition methods GetPendingOrders or GetInvoiceDetails. The bug is that in the SQL query of those methods, biblioitems.publishercode and biblioitems.publicationyear. In uncertainprice.pl those datas are fetch using GetBiblioData. It whould be better to fetch them in GetPendingOrders and GetInvoiceDetails.
"The bug is that in the SQL query of those methods, biblioitems.publishercode and biblioitems.publicationyear." I think your sentence was broken ;-) What's the bug exactly? Mathieu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de --- Comment #6 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- Hi there, I haven't tested it yet, but there I think it won't work for MARC21. While UNIMARC uses publicationyear, MARC21 uses copyrightyear by default to store the publication year from 260$c. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #7 from mathieu saby <mathieu.saby@univ-rennes2.fr> --- (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #6)
Hi there, I haven't tested it yet, but there I think it won't work for MARC21. While UNIMARC uses publicationyear, MARC21 uses copyrightyear by default to store the publication year from 260$c.
The structure of the 2 marcflavor is the same (date in plain text in 260/210 + date in coded form). They should be indexed the same way. Mathieu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #8 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- I thnk this is a display problem here? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #9 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- What I meant to say is that we save the data into 2 different fields in the database, so one field is always empty depending on the marcflavour. Hope that explains it better :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #10 from mathieu saby <mathieu.saby@univ-rennes2.fr> --- I did not look the patch, I thought of Zebra and not of the db... I don't know well MARC21, but at a first glance, the date in 260/210 is not meant to be searchable, but displayed (as the dates in coded fields are supposed to be the same, but machine-readable). Am I wrong? Mathieu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #11 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- I think we are misunderstanding each other - the publication year data will be in a different field in a MARC21 database, so I think the SQL query changed here needs to take biblio.copyrightdate into account too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #12 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolyn.somers@biblibre.com> --- (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #11)
the publication year data will be in a different field in a MARC21 database, so I think the SQL query changed here needs to take biblio.copyrightdate into account too. Ok, but actually the copyrightdate is missing in templates. This is could be a new bug no ?
-- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Needs Signoff |Patch doesn't apply CC| |dcook@prosentient.com.au --- Comment #13 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- Fridolyn: I agree that changing the templates to include copyrightdate would be another bug, since the templates don't include it already. However, I think it would still be prudent to add biblio.copyrightdate to your patch, since it was already included in the past with the biblio.* select. In any case, this patch needs to be rebased, as 3.14.0 (I think) merged "SearchOrders" and "GetPendingOrders". -- Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders 22306 - Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders Apply? [(y)es, (n)o, (i)nteractive] y Applying: Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders Using index info to reconstruct a base tree... Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge... Auto-merging koha-tmpl/intranet-tmpl/prog/en/modules/acqui/parcel.tt Auto-merging acqui/uncertainprice.pl CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in acqui/uncertainprice.pl Auto-merging C4/Acquisition.pm CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in C4/Acquisition.pm Failed to merge in the changes. Patch failed at 0001 Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders When you have resolved this problem run "git bz apply --continue". If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git bz apply --skip". To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git bz apply --abort". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtompset@hotmail.com --- Comment #14 from M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> --- Question of interest, are the changes in C4/Acquisition.pm properly tested in some test file somewhere? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Patch doesn't apply |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #22306|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #15 from M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> --- Created attachment 38130 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=38130&action=edit Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders In acquisition, several templates try to display publisher code and publication year : invoice.tt, parcel.tt, transferorder.tt. Thoses pages use C4::Acquisition methods GetPendingOrders or GetInvoiceDetails. The bug is that in the SQL query of those methods, biblioitems.publishercode and biblioitems.publicationyear. In uncertainprice.pl those datas are fetch using GetBiblioData. It whould be better to fetch them in GetPendingOrders and GetInvoiceDetails. This patch changes SQL queries to fetch wanted datas : aqorders.*,biblio.title,biblio.author,biblioitems.isbn,biblioitems.publishercode,biblioitems.publicationyear. GetInvoiceDetails also needs : biblio.seriestitle,biblioitems.volume. This patch also unifies the way biblio datas are displayed : <a href="link to catalog using biblionumber">[title]</a> <em>by</em> [author] – [isbn] <em>Publisher:</em> [publishercode], [publicationyear] Test plan : - Choose a biblio record containing a data in : biblio.title, biblio.author, biblioitems.isbn, biblioitems.publishercode, biblioitems.publicationyear, biblio.seriestitle, biblioitems.volume. - Create an order using this biblio. - Look at this order in pages : parcel.pl, transferorder.pl, uncertainprice.pl => You see publisher code and publication year - Look at this order in page : invoice.pl => You see publisher code, publication year, series title and volume -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #16 from M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> --- My question about testing changes more completely still stands (comment #14). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Needs Signoff |Failed QA --- Comment #17 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> --- I am sorry, but this is not MARC agnostic - while UNIMARC uses publicationyear, MARC21 standard installations save this information in copyrightdate. Please take this into account. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #18 from M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> --- (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #17)
I am sorry, but this is not MARC agnostic - while UNIMARC uses publicationyear, MARC21 standard installations save this information in copyrightdate. Please take this into account.
Actually, this is agnostic. For MARC, the output should be unchanged. For UNIMARC, the publication year will be added. Are you saying that copyrightdate should be used too, so that UNIMARC and MARC21 installations will have identical output? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Failed QA |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #19 from M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> --- Created attachment 38146 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=38146&action=edit Bug 11122: Address MARC21 vs. UNIMARC issue In comment #6 and comment #17, Katrin pointed out the discrepancy between UNIMARC (using publisheryear) vs. Other MARC installations (using copyrightdate). This was dealt with in invoice.tt already. This patch does similar logic for the other 3 template files. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #20 from Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de> ---
Are you saying that copyrightdate should be used too, so that UNIMARC and MARC21 installations will have identical output?
Yep. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jonathan.druart@biblibre.co | |m Status|Needs Signoff |Failed QA --- Comment #21 from Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com> --- t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t .. Dubious, test returned 2 (wstat 512, 0x200) Failed 2/87 subtests -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Failed QA |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 --- Comment #22 from M. Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com> --- Created attachment 38667 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=38667&action=edit Bug 11122: Follow up Based on comment #21, this patch corrects the failings in the t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t tests. When two fields were added to the query, the corresponding array in the the test file was not updated to match. TEST PLAN --------- 1) Apply the first two patches 2) prove -v t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t -- fails 2 tests 3) Apply this patch 4) prove -v t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t -- passes 5) Run koha qa test tools. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Joonas Kylmälä <j.kylmala@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |j.kylmala@gmail.com Status|Needs Signoff |Patch doesn't apply -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #38130|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #23 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 44710 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=44710&action=edit Bug 11122 - publisher code and publication year not fetched in acq orders In acquisition, several templates try to display publisher code and publication year : invoice.tt, parcel.tt, transferorder.tt. Thoses pages use C4::Acquisition methods GetPendingOrders or GetInvoiceDetails. The bug is that in the SQL query of those methods, biblioitems.publishercode and biblioitems.publicationyear. In uncertainprice.pl those datas are fetch using GetBiblioData. It whould be better to fetch them in GetPendingOrders and GetInvoiceDetails. This patch changes SQL queries to fetch wanted datas : aqorders.*,biblio.title,biblio.author,biblioitems.isbn,biblioitems.publishercode,biblioitems.publicationyear. GetInvoiceDetails also needs : biblio.seriestitle,biblioitems.volume. This patch also unifies the way biblio datas are displayed : <a href="link to catalog using biblionumber">[title]</a> <em>by</em> [author] – [isbn] <em>Publisher:</em> [publishercode], [publicationyear] Test plan : - Choose a biblio record containing a data in : biblio.title, biblio.author, biblioitems.isbn, biblioitems.publishercode, biblioitems.publicationyear, biblio.seriestitle, biblioitems.volume. - Create an order using this biblio. - Look at this order in pages : parcel.pl, transferorder.pl, uncertainprice.pl => You see publisher code and publication year - Look at this order in page : invoice.pl => You see publisher code, publication year, series title and volume -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #38146|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #24 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 44711 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=44711&action=edit Bug 11122: Address MARC21 vs. UNIMARC issue In comment #6 and comment #17, Katrin pointed out the discrepancy between UNIMARC (using publisheryear) vs. Other MARC installations (using copyrightdate). This was dealt with in invoice.tt already. This patch does similar logic for the other 3 template files. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #38667|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #25 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> --- Created attachment 44712 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=44712&action=edit Bug 11122: Follow up Based on comment #21, this patch corrects the failings in the t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t tests. When two fields were added to the query, the corresponding array in the the test file was not updated to match. TEST PLAN --------- 1) Apply the first two patches 2) prove -v t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t -- fails 2 tests 3) Apply this patch 4) prove -v t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t -- passes 5) Run koha qa test tools. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11122 Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Patch doesn't apply |Needs Signoff --- Comment #26 from Fridolin SOMERS <fridolin.somers@biblibre.com> --- Patches rebased : no real conflict -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla-daemon＠bugs.koha-community.org