Summary: | Patron-requested holds limited to one item per bib. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Chris Cormack <chris> |
Component: | Circulation | Assignee: | Galen Charlton <gmcharlt> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | bob, ephetteplace, jsasse, jwagner, lculber, library, mcoalwell |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
GIT URL: | Change sponsored?: | --- | |
Patch complexity: | --- | Documentation contact: | |
Documentation submission: | Text to go in the release notes: | ||
Version(s) released in: | Circulation function: | ||
Bug Depends on: | 4239 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Chris Cormack
2010-05-21 00:52:16 UTC
>This is not at all user-friendly. Can another column be added derived from the
>952h (Serial Enumeration / chronology)and displayed on the hold page in both
>the OPAC and staff?
This is the case since 3.2
But there is no functionality yet to allow multiple holds on one record.
This bug is so old that I wonder what the original reasoning behind it was. I assume that it was intended to prevent users from gaming the holds system by placing holds on multiple copies at multiple locations in an attempt to improve chances of a fast delivery (perhaps branch A will get it first for me, perhaps branch B). Does anyone know of a different reason? I am marking this 'In discussion.' It is hardly new. :) At least one library I know of wants this enhancement. Owen has explained that there is concern the feature could allow gaming of the holds queue. Maybe a way to control that could be discerned? Should the feature be developed and a 'wait and see' approach adopted to the gaming risk? Hm, this reads a bit like a duplicate to bug 14695 - can someone confirm? It looks like a duplicate to me, too. |