Bug 6530

Summary: item due notice label saying 'unknown'
Product: Koha Reporter: Nicole C. Engard <nengard>
Component: TemplatesAssignee: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer>
Status: CLOSED FIXED QA Contact: Bugs List <koha-bugs>
Severity: major    
Priority: PATCH-Sent (DO NOT USE) CC: brendan, chris, cnighswonger, dpavlin, katrin.fischer, paul.poulain
Version: 3.6   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Change sponsored?: --- Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact: Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Attachments: screenshot, installation with German sample files
Bug 6530: Item Due notice label displaying as 'unknown'
Bug 6530: Item Due notice label displaying as 'unknown'

Description Nicole C. Engard 2011-06-24 14:01:02 UTC
This is a recurrence, but I can't find the original bug.  So, on the patron messaging tab it says 'unknown' instead of 'item due'
Comment 1 Brendan Gallagher 2011-07-07 03:05:42 UTC
This does not seem to be an issue with current code.  

Marking as works for me.
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2011-11-20 21:27:47 UTC
In some languages the sample file are still wrong. Sample files have Item_DUE instead of Item_Due, causing the message name to be shown as unknown.
Comment 3 Katrin Fischer 2011-11-20 21:31:05 UTC
Created attachment 6350 [details]
screenshot, installation with German sample files
Comment 4 Katrin Fischer 2011-11-20 21:37:44 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 5 Chris Cormack 2011-12-01 18:52:18 UTC
Created attachment 6492 [details] [review]
Bug 6530: Item Due notice label displaying as 'unknown'

Some of the translated sql files still had 'Item_DUE' instead
of 'Item_Due' causing the staff interface to display 'unknown'
instead of the correct description.

To test:
- Do a new installation, using German, French, Polish, Russian or Ukrainian sample files.
- Actived EnhancedMessagingPreferences
- Create a new patron category and check message descriptions display correctly

Signed-off-by: Chris Cormack <chrisc@catalyst.net.nz>
Comment 6 Paul Poulain 2011-12-06 19:06:21 UTC
QA comment:
* clean code, nothing to say about what is provided
* For libraries already installed with a wrong value, an updatedatabase is needed. I'we written it, and tested

Patch and follow-up pushed
Comment 7 Chris Nighswonger 2011-12-06 19:17:47 UTC
This patch does not apply cleanly to the 3.6.x branch. Please rebase over 3.6.x and attach a corrected patch to this bug report.
Comment 8 Katrin Fischer 2011-12-06 19:56:46 UTC
Paul, I am quite confused by the version number for the updatedatabase you did for this and about the numbers before since 3.06 release:

74 $DBversion = "3.06.02.001"; ?

Shouldn't we count 3.07.00.XX in master?
Comment 9 Paul Poulain 2011-12-07 15:47:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #8)
> Paul, I am quite confused by the version number for the updatedatabase you did
> for this and about the numbers before since 3.06 release:
> 
> 74 $DBversion = "3.06.02.001"; ?
> 
> Shouldn't we count 3.07.00.XX in master?

Katrin,

This bugfix will be available in 3.6.2, so it sounded logical to number it 3.06.02.001
I had a pm discussion with chris_n and chris_c about that, and it seems they have a different opinion. I think we should speak of this during our next IRC meeting (in 2 hours )
I've added the topic to our agenda