Description
Lucas Gass (lukeg)
2024-11-01 20:21:37 UTC
Created attachment 173892 [details] [review] Bug 38331: Add date accessioned column to item search results To test: 1. APPLY PATCH, restart_all 2. Do an item search, you should not see a 'Date aquired' column. 3. Go to Administration > Table settings. 4. Under catalog find the dateaccessioned column. BY default it should be hidden. 5. Uncheck it to make that column show. 6. Do step 2 again, this time you should see the date accessioned column. 7. Make sure the data in the column is correct. 8. From the top navbar click 'Export all results to', making sure the 'Date aquaied' column is in the CSV. Note about exporting. With Bug 37238 we now have two ways of exporting files like CSV. Do we want to keep both? The dataTables one is nice because it will only export columns you have exposed. Created attachment 173921 [details] [review] Bug 38331: Add date accessioned column to item search results To test: 1. APPLY PATCH, restart_all 2. Do an item search, you should not see a 'Date aquired' column. 3. Go to Administration > Table settings. 4. Under catalog find the dateaccessioned column. BY default it should be hidden. 5. Uncheck it to make that column show. 6. Do step 2 again, this time you should see the date accessioned column. 7. Make sure the data in the column is correct. 8. From the top navbar click 'Export all results to', making sure the 'Date aquaied' column is in the CSV. Note about exporting. With Bug 37238 we now have two ways of exporting files like CSV. Do we want to keep both? The dataTables one is nice because it will only export columns you have exposed. Signed-off-by: Michaela Sieber <michaela.sieber@kit.edu> This was pushed back by bug 37238. Extending deadline to Wednesday. Not going to be in 24.11.00. This patch no longer applies. While we're at it, I'm rolling bug 38671 into this one: Let's add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, and withdrawn_on to the available results columns in item search. *** Bug 38671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Heck, let's add datelastseen while we're here! Created attachment 175415 [details] [review] Bug 38331: add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen as options in item search results to test: 1 - have items with values in dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen 2 - perform an item search that returns those items 3 - observe these values are not available 4 - apply patch, restart_all 5 - repeat item search, those values still don't show 6 - go to table settings, see dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen are now available to be displayed, but are hidden by default 7 - adjust table settings to show all new fields 8 - repeat search, now you see values! 9 - export results in available formats, confirm new values are in export Be aware, filtering on date columns gets confusing if you're using a date format other than YYYY-MM-DD. That issue predates this patch: https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=38692 Created attachment 175418 [details] [review] Bug 38331: add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen as options in item search results to test: 1 - have items with values in dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen 2 - perform an item search that returns those items 3 - observe these values are not available 4 - apply patch, restart_all 5 - repeat item search, those values still don't show 6 - go to table settings, see dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen are now available to be displayed, but are hidden by default 7 - adjust table settings to show all new fields 8 - repeat search, now you see values! 9 - export results in available formats, confirm new values are in export Signed-off-by: Jason Robb <jrobb@sekls.org> Created attachment 177855 [details] [review] Bug 38331: add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen as options in item search results to test: 1 - have items with values in dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen 2 - perform an item search that returns those items 3 - observe these values are not available 4 - apply patch, restart_all 5 - repeat item search, those values still don't show 6 - go to table settings, see dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen are now available to be displayed, but are hidden by default 7 - adjust table settings to show all new fields 8 - repeat search, now you see values! 9 - export results in available formats, confirm new values are in export Signed-off-by: Jason Robb <jrobb@sekls.org> Patch rebased using the auto-rebase script. Comment on attachment 177855 [details] [review] Bug 38331: add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen as options in item search results Review of attachment 177855 [details] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: koha-tmpl/intranet-tmpl/prog/en/includes/catalogue/itemsearch_item.csv.inc @@ +50,5 @@ > +"[% item.dateaccessioned | $KohaDates | $raw %]" > +[%- delimiter | $raw -%] > +"[% item.itemlost_on | $KohaDates | $raw %]" > +[%- delimiter | $raw -%] > +"[% item.damged_on | $KohaDates | $raw %]" Typo and patch doesn't apply. Created attachment 179116 [details] [review] Bug 38331: Add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelasteen to itemsearch results to test: 1 - have items with values in dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen 2 - perform an item search that returns those items 3 - observe these values are not available 4 - apply patch, restart_all 5 - repeat item search, those values still don't show 6 - go to table settings, see dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen are now available to be displayed, but are hidden by default 7 - adjust table settings to show all new fields 8 - repeat search, now you see values! 9 - export results in available formats, confirm new values are in export Not sure why but I am seeing the damaged_on column, I am expecting it to be hidden by default. *** Bug 13965 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Created attachment 183146 [details] [review] Bug 38331: Add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelasteen to itemsearch results Fixed typo in columns_setting.yml damaged_on should now be hidden by default. to test: 1 - have items with values in dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen 2 - perform an item search that returns those items 3 - observe these values are not available 4 - apply patch, restart_all 5 - repeat item search, those values still don't show 6 - go to table settings, see dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen are now available to be displayed, but are hidden by default 7 - adjust table settings to show all new fields 8 - repeat search, now you see values! 9 - export results in available formats, confirm new values are in export Doesn't apply now Ah, I see. We should obsolete the first patch. Actually, if I obsolete the first Andrew will not get credit for his work. I will obsolete Eric's patch. Eric, thanks for the help. Can you provide your patch as a follow-up to Andrew's so he can get credit for the first patch? Created attachment 183264 [details] [review] Bug 38331: Add dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelasteen to itemsearch results Fixed typo in columns_setting.yml damaged_on should now be hidden by default. to test: 1 - have items with values in dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen 2 - perform an item search that returns those items 3 - observe these values are not available 4 - apply patch, restart_all 5 - repeat item search, those values still don't show 6 - go to table settings, see dateaccessioned, itemlost_on, damaged_on, withdrawn_on, datelastseen are now available to be displayed, but are hidden by default 7 - adjust table settings to show all new fields 8 - repeat search, now you see values! 9 - export results in available formats, confirm new values are in export Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com> Created attachment 183265 [details] [review] Bug 38331: (follow-up) Rename item search results column headings Rename the item search results column headings so that they are shorter and more succinct: - Date accessioned -> Date acquired (to match up with the input field name) - Item lost on date -> Date lost - Item damaged on date > Date damaged - Withdrawn on date -> Date withdrawn - Date last seen -> no change Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com> I've added a follow-up patch to rename the item search results columns: - Date accessioned -> Date acquired (to match up with the input field name - 952$d (d - Date acquired)) - Item lost on date -> Date lost - Item damaged on date > Date damaged - Withdrawn on date -> Date withdrawn - Date last seen -> no change Reasons: - this is an item search, so including 'item' in the column title is unnecessary - shorter and more succinct An alternative to my follow-up would be lost date, damaged date, withdrawn date, acquired date. Additional suggestion: Show the date fields after the appropriate column for the setting. For example, put damaged_on after damaged status. Testing notes (using KTD): 1. For step 1, edit some items for records: - Date acquired (dateaccessioned): most items already have a date accessioned, but you can add in 952$d (d - Date acquired) - Dates for the various statuses - add a status value for these fields, the date the status is changed is used for these fields: . itemlost_on: mark an items as lost, choose a lost staus for 952$1 (1 - Lost status) . damaged_on: mark an item as damaged, choose a damage status for 952$4 (4 - Damaged status) . withdrawn_on: mark an item as withdrawn, choose a withdrawn status for 952$0 (0 - Withdrawn status) - Date last seen (datelastseen): check some items out to a patron In addition to the columns listed in this bug, our staff members have asked for itemnotes and itemnotes_nonpublic -columns. Is it too late to suggest these would be added as well or should they be proposed in a separete bug ticket? (In reply to Anni Mäki-Mantila from comment #24) > In addition to the columns listed in this bug, our staff members have asked > for itemnotes and itemnotes_nonpublic -columns. Is it too late to suggest > these would be added as well or should they be proposed in a separete bug > ticket? Anni, I would suggest opening a new bug for those additional enhancements. Bug 13823 - item search should include note fields exists! |