Description
Katrin Fischer
2022-08-19 15:11:27 UTC
This is quite frankly, horrifying. I know a lot of large library systems and consortiums use library limitations. I agree with Katrin's solution - show the user what it currently is, and allow me to change if it needed, but don't let me change it to something that I am not permitted to use based on limitations. Thx Donna, I had missed you already found this one! Not getting much attention yet :( Created attachment 142259 [details] [review] Bug 31422: Add patron's current category to dropdown while editing Created attachment 142285 [details] [review] Bug 31422: Add patron's current category to dropdown while editing Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com> Testing notes (using koha-testing-docker): 1. Replicated issue for example 2 in comment #1: . Patron used: Mary Burton (changed library to Centerville) 2. Applied the patch. 3. Retested: . When editing, now displays current patron category (previously it was blank) . Now has an ! icon next to it with this message when you hover over it: "The patron's current category (Patron) is limited to other branches" . If you save without changing the patron category, the patron category remains the same (so no data loss) . If you change the patron category and save, the patron category is changed - if you go to edit it again you can't choose the patron category with the limitation 4. Bug 31421 and bug 19361 deal with the other issues in the description. If I am reading the comments, this patch only solves one issue but the description is broader than that? Am I correct? Or will the other issue(s) be addressed separately? (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #6) > If I am reading the comments, this patch only solves one issue but the > description is broader than that? Am I correct? Or will the other issue(s) > be addressed separately? Other issues handled on related bugs in 'See also' section Created attachment 143050 [details] [review] Bug 31422: Add patron's current category to dropdown while editing Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com> Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de> Created attachment 143051 [details] [review] Bug 31422: (QA follow-up) Fix terminology and switch icon * fa-exclamation-circle looks more like 'info', but I feel this should be more of a warning, so switched to fa-exclamation-triangle * Changed branches to libraries in message Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de> Thanks Nick for tackling this, it was bothering us quite a bit. I wonder if the warning should stand out even more. I have updated the image to fa-exclamation-triangle to give it more of a warning character in the follow-up. Maybe it would be nice to also have a confirmation message if the category was changed? Commit message could have more words! ;) Pushed to master for 22.11. Nice work everyone, thanks! (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #10) > Commit message could have more words! ;) Yes, definitely! :D *** Bug 32703 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Can this be backported to 22.05? (In reply to Christopher Brannon from comment #14) > Can this be backported to 22.05? This is a string patch, it can be backported during next month's cycle. (In reply to Lucas Gass from comment #15) > (In reply to Christopher Brannon from comment #14) > > Can this be backported to 22.05? > > This is a string patch, it can be backported during next month's cycle. Nice. Thanks! This, and Bug 32119, contain too many merge conflicts for 22.05.x. So no backport. Created attachment 147698 [details] [review] Bug 31422: [22.05.x] Add patron's current category to dropdown while editing Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com> Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de> Bug 31422: (QA follow-up) Fix terminology and switch icon * fa-exclamation-circle looks more like 'info', but I feel this should be more of a warning, so switched to fa-exclamation-triangle * Changed branches to libraries in message Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de> (In reply to Lucas Gass from comment #17) > This, and Bug 32119, contain too many merge conflicts for 22.05.x. So no > backport. Please test, I did not - you may not need 32119 *** Bug 33458 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 21255 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** (In reply to Lucas Gass from comment #17) > This, and Bug 32119, contain too many merge conflicts for 22.05.x. So no > backport. Oh no! We could really use this. That is too bad! Can we close ? |