Bug 2806

---- Reported by nengard@gmail.com 2008-11-18 07:42:19 ----

In the issues and old_issues table, the issuingbranch field isn't being populated.

[10:13]  <rch> issuingbranch isn't used...
[10:13]  <rch> INSERT INTO issues (borrowernumber, itemnumber,issuedate, date_due, branchcode)
[10:17]  <acmoore> rch: if we're not populating the issuingbranch, that should probably be recorded as a bug. Dontcha think?
[10:19]  <rch> nengard: yes, i do.  
[10:19]  <rch> we do record it, in the statistics table, but i agree it should be in the issues table, and don't understand why it's not.
[10:20]  <acmoore> ah. OK, well maybe the bug is that there's an extra field in the issues table. If there's no broken functionality, I guess I wouldn't report anything.
[10:33]  <nengard> acmoore, rch should i report that bug or did you?
[10:38]  <rch> nengard: not me.  i do think the data should be in the issues table.  there are other extra columns in the issues table as well.



---- Additional Comments From mason@kohaaloha.com 2009-03-24 21:19:54 ----

(In reply to comment #0)
> In the issues and old_issues table, the issuingbranch field isn't being
> populated.
> 
> [10:13]  <rch> issuingbranch isn't used...
> [10:13]  <rch> INSERT INTO issues (borrowernumber, itemnumber,issuedate,
> date_due, branchcode)
> [10:17]  <acmoore> rch: if we're not populating the issuingbranch, that should
> probably be recorded as a bug. Dontcha think?
> [10:19]  <rch> nengard: yes, i do.  
> [10:19]  <rch> we do record it, in the statistics table, but i agree it should
> be in the issues table, and don't understand why it's not.
> [10:20]  <acmoore> ah. OK, well maybe the bug is that there's an extra field in
> the issues table. If there's no broken functionality, I guess I wouldn't report
> anything.
> [10:33]  <nengard> acmoore, rch should i report that bug or did you?
> [10:38]  <rch> nengard: not me.  i do think the data should be in the issues
> table.  there are other extra columns in the issues table as well.
> 

i just bumped into this bug too

so the issue here (no pun inteneded ;) is that the issues.issuingbranch column is unneeded?, as the issuing branch info is currently stored in the issues.branchcode column.

so... the fix for this is to remove issues.issuingbranch from koha-struct.sql and a patch to remove the column - in updatedatabase.pl ?

(and possibly to fix some misc. reports and templates that may refer to it too...)

comments anyone?



---- Additional Comments From nengard@gmail.com 2009-03-25 14:08:02 ----

As I said before - I do think that this info should be in the issues table. Also I think Ryan is saying that it should be populated.  I think the branchcode field is the home branch - not the issuing branch.  Correct me if I'm wrong.



---- Additional Comments From oleonard@myacpl.org 2010-05-19 13:51:52 ----

In my tests the value saved in issues.branchcode is the issuing branch, whether it is specifically recording the branch at which it is being checked out or it is recording the new holdingbranch value for the item now that it has been checked out from that branch. I'd like to see someone trace the data all the way through the transaction to confirm what's going on. If my tests are correct, the issuingbranch column is redundant.



--- Bug imported by chris@bigballofwax.co.nz 2010-05-21 00:56 UTC  ---

This bug was previously known as _bug_ 2806 at http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=2806

Actual time not defined. Setting to 0.0
CC member mason@kohaaloha.com does not have an account here