[Koha-bugs] [Bug 7303] Not being able to create funds with the same name

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7303

claire.hernandez at biblibre.com <claire.hernandez at biblibre.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|In Discussion               |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID

--- Comment #9 from claire.hernandez at biblibre.com <claire.hernandez at biblibre.com> ---
The feature asked by the customer cannot be rebased like this in the community
version.

Technically it is not possible to have a constraint on the fund code or name.
Usability point of view, each time a user adds a new fund with an existant code
koha will asked him "are you sure..." (could be another bz).

The initial patch adds nothing pertinent in the community version and breaks
another wanted feature (duplicate budget hierarchy) so I will close it.


(In reply to comment #8)
> Hi Jonathan and all,
> 
> I still think a unique key on aqbudgets.budget_name and
> aqbudgets.budget_code it's a bad idea and will break workflows for libraries.
> 
> 1) The aqbudgets table already has a primary key (budget_id) as has
> aqbudgetperiods (budget_period_id).
>  
> 2) It will make it impossible to duplicate your budget hierarchy for the
> next year which is a working feature in master.
> 
> 3) A feature I am asked for is a way to move orders and money from one year
> to the next. I think if it's allowed to use the same codes, this is very
> easy to do - but if you are forced to change them each year, you will need
> some tool for mapping funds over several years.
> 
> 4) The codes libraries here use do not change with each year - you would
> force them to add a prefix/suffix or something similar. This would make
> their life harder, for example when they need reports with the official
> codes and descriptions.
> 
> 5) It's currently not enforced - I think the update database will not work?
> 
> If this is only a check for libraries editing/adding new funds, couldn't we
> make it only check for duplicates in the same time period/budget? And a way
> to overwrite if it's intended?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.