[Koha-bugs] [Bug 2720] Overdues which debar automatically should undebar automatically when returned

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

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=2720

Owen Leonard <oleonard at myacpl.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|Needs Signoff               |Failed QA

--- Comment #15 from Owen Leonard <oleonard at myacpl.org> ---
Some test results:

- There is a typo in updatedatabase, a reversed end parenthesis.
- There is at least once instance of "debar" being used instead of "restrict" 
- I think the "X" icon isn't appropriate here. It would be simpler and more
  clear to use text ("Remove").
- The table of restrictions doesn't look correct if there are no
  restrictions--probably because there is nothing in <tbody>? Anyway
  I think it would be more consistent to separate the entry from from
  the table. Wrapping <form> around <tfoot> is invalid.
- onclick="return confirm(_('Remove debarment?'))" at line 24 of 
  borrower_debarments.inc is not translatable. The action should be moved
  to a function.
- borrower_debarments.inc has a couple of unescaped ampersands in line 24.

I don't think the "Restrictions" tab should be present on circulation.pl at all
times. Being able to add a restriction to an account is certainly not something
which happens so frequently that it needs to be only one click away. 

It's useful to be able to see information about all restrictions, but the full
information could just as easily be displayed in the main block of "Cannot
check out!" messages at the top. There's no reason to conserve space there if
the patron is restricted anyway. If we mimicked the current method for
displaying restrictions we could simply make it possible to display more than
one line of restrictions, each with the same "lift restriction" button or link.

If we did this then we could move the form for adding a manual restriction
either back into the patron edit form (where people still expect to find it) or
onto its own page (not as good an option IMO).

One idea for an improvement: Perhaps the overdue notices job could set a
restricted comment with the datetime of the job? "Restriction added by overdues
process 2013-03-05 00:20:00"

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are watching all bug changes.