Bug 10389 - Share a list (part 2: accept the invitation)
Summary: Share a list (part 2: accept the invitation)
Status: CLOSED MOVED
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Lists (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Marcel de Rooy
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-06-01 08:06 UTC by Marcel de Rooy
Modified: 2014-11-29 09:11 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments
Bug 10389: Share a list (part 2: accept the invitation) (7.90 KB, patch)
2013-07-12 15:16 UTC, Marcel de Rooy
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 10389: Share a list (part 2: accept the invitation) (15.99 KB, patch)
2013-08-01 10:13 UTC, Marcel de Rooy
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 10389: Add unit tests for AcceptShare and IsSharedList (2.33 KB, patch)
2013-08-01 10:13 UTC, Marcel de Rooy
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 10389: Remove an accepted share (7.06 KB, patch)
2013-08-01 13:07 UTC, Marcel de Rooy
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Marcel de Rooy 2013-06-01 08:06:31 UTC
This report is a followup for bug 9032.
It will handle accepting the invitation when the patron clicks on the link in the invitation email.
But it will also take care of some futher needed adjustments:
Showing the type Shared in the private lists overview.
Handling the deletion of a shared list (on both sides: owner and sharer).
And maybe a little code housekeeping on the way..
Comment 1 Marcel de Rooy 2013-06-06 13:17:17 UTC
Housekeeping thing to do:
Adjustment for _CheckShelfName?
What to do with patron A that receives a share from B and a share from C but incidentally these two private lists have the same name.

Or should we just allow duplicate names for lists? This will make life not easier in the current popups for adding items..
Comment 2 Marcel de Rooy 2013-07-12 15:16:15 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Marcel de Rooy 2013-07-12 15:18:32 UTC
This patch only shows that there is still progress here..
Still needs some attention though. Not ready for signoff yet.
Comment 4 Marcel de Rooy 2013-08-01 10:13:22 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 5 Marcel de Rooy 2013-08-01 10:13:29 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 6 Marcel de Rooy 2013-08-01 13:07:00 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 7 Marcel de Rooy 2013-08-01 13:12:41 UTC
Together with bug 9032, I think these patches are Koha-ready imo. You can share lists, remove the shares and end sharing by deleting the list.

Note that I did omit adding the share/accept functions on the staff side, just viewing it as an opac function (like others?). But if really wanted or needed, a similar staff script can be added later on.

Without blocking this report too, I still plan adding the option to optionally disown instead of delete a shared or public list. (The owner wants to get rid of the list, but the other users may still like it.) That report will come with some functionality too to handle the lists without owner at staff side (including permissions).
 
Another remaining item to discuss and perhaps handle on a new report, would be handling name clashes. See Comment 1.

For now, please help with sign-off or QA..
Comment 8 I'm just a bot 2013-09-18 11:20:55 UTC
Applying: Bug 10389: Share a list (part 2: accept the invitation)
Repository lacks necessary blobs to fall back on 3-way merge.
Cannot fall back to three-way merge.
Patch failed at 0001 Bug 10389: Share a list (part 2: accept the invitation)
The copy of the patch that failed is found in:
   /home/christopher/git/koha/.git/rebase-apply/patch
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
Comment 9 Marcel de Rooy 2014-03-01 10:04:23 UTC
I will move this code to bug 9032.
Close this report now.