From 19ce4092cc02ab91b34d0ffe6b3ae3606de445b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Robin Sheat <robin@catalyst.net.nz>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:33:00 +1300
Subject: [PATCH] Bug 11947 - renumber reserves when hold is confirmed

Currently when a reserve is moved to "waiting" status because it's
acknowledged on checkin, the reserve priorities aren't renumbered. This
causes things to go a bit haywire in the UI, in particular, some
reserves can unjustly end up with priority 1 when they shouldn't. It
also seemed to mess with the logic of who should get it next, but I
didn't look too closely at that.

This patch forces a renumbering so that all the priorities remain
copacetic.

Test plan:
* have a few borrowers, say 4.
* have a biblio with a single item (you can scale this up, it should
  work just the same.)
* issue the item to borrower A
* have borrowers B, C, and D place a hold on the item
* return the item, acknowledge that it'll be put aside for B.
* view the holds on the item.
Without the patch:
* the hold priorities in the UI end up being "waiting, 2, 1" when they
  should be "waiting, 1, 2".
* in the database "reserves" table, they're really "0, 2, 3" when they
  should be "0, 1, 2".
With the patch:
* the hold priorities in the UI end up being "waiting, 1, 2"
* in the database, they're "0, 1, 2"

[New version, including test case.]
---
 C4/Reserves.pm            |  2 +-
 t/db_dependent/Reserves.t | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/C4/Reserves.pm b/C4/Reserves.pm
index 7a914e3..122144d 100644
--- a/C4/Reserves.pm
+++ b/C4/Reserves.pm
@@ -1296,7 +1296,7 @@ sub ModReserveAffect {
     $sth = $dbh->prepare($query);
     $sth->execute( $itemnumber, $borrowernumber,$biblionumber);
     _koha_notify_reserve( $itemnumber, $borrowernumber, $biblionumber ) if ( !$transferToDo && !$already_on_shelf );
-
+    _FixPriority( { biblionumber => $biblionumber } );
     if ( C4::Context->preference("ReturnToShelvingCart") ) {
       CartToShelf( $itemnumber );
     }
diff --git a/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t b/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t
index 4b0058c..bd6fb4a 100755
--- a/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t
+++ b/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 use Modern::Perl;
 
-use Test::More tests => 31;
+use Test::More tests => 34;
 use MARC::Record;
 use DateTime::Duration;
 
@@ -199,6 +199,30 @@ my ($itemnum_cpl, $itemnum_fpl);
         barcode => 'bug10272_FPL'
     } , $bibnum2);
 
+# Ensure that priorities are numbered correcly when a hold is moved to waiting
+# (bug 11947)
+$dbh->do("DELETE FROM reserves WHERE biblionumber=?",undef,($bibnum2));
+AddReserve('RPL',  $requesters{'RPL'}, $bibnum2,
+           $constraint, $bibitems,  1, $resdate, $expdate, $notes,
+           $title,      $checkitem, $found);
+AddReserve('FPL',  $requesters{'FPL'}, $bibnum2,
+           $constraint, $bibitems,  2, $resdate, $expdate, $notes,
+           $title,      $checkitem, $found);
+AddReserve('CPL',  $requesters{'CPL'}, $bibnum2,
+           $constraint, $bibitems,  3, $resdate, $expdate, $notes,
+           $title,      $checkitem, $found);
+ModReserveAffect($itemnum_cpl, $requesters{'RPL'}, 0);
+
+# Now it should have different priorities.
+my ($count, $title_reserves) = GetReservesFromBiblionumber($bibnum2);
+# Sort by reserve number in case the database gives us oddly ordered results
+my @reserves = sort { $a->{reserve_id} <=> $b->{reserve_id} } @$title_reserves;
+is($reserves[0]{priority}, 0, 'Item is correctly waiting');
+is($reserves[1]{priority}, 1, 'Item is correctly priority 1');
+is($reserves[2]{priority}, 2, 'Item is correctly priority 2');
+
+
+$dbh->do("DELETE FROM reserves WHERE biblionumber=?",undef,($bibnum2));
 AddReserve('RPL',  $requesters{'RPL'}, $bibnum2,
            $constraint, $bibitems,  1, $resdate, $expdate, $notes,
            $title,      $checkitem, $found);
-- 
1.8.3.2