Summary: | Damaged items need more control over holds | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Christopher Brannon <cbrannon> |
Component: | Hold requests | Assignee: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | gmcharlt, holly |
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: |
Description
Christopher Brannon
2020-12-16 17:53:37 UTC
I believe it would be really hard to deal with this change for upgrades as we cannot tell how libraries have used lost values (items, several system preferences, longoverdue cron, reports, etc). But admittedly adding consistency would be nice. (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #1) > I believe it would be really hard to deal with this change for upgrades as > we cannot tell how libraries have used lost values (items, several system > preferences, longoverdue cron, reports, etc). > But admittedly adding consistency would be nice. I agree it would probably be hard, but not impossible. I would imagine a similar situation was faced with NOT_LOAN, assuming it didn't start out with this option. I see two library needs that are more specific than the blanket on/off of AllowHoldsOnDamagedItems. 1. Make specific DAMAGED values holdable or not, just like NOT_LOAN. 2. Select whether holdable damaged items can fill holds or not. Currently if AllowHoldsOnDamagedItems is turned on, damaged items will appear on the holds to pull/holds queue. |