Summary: | date acquired is shipping date | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Nicole C. Engard <nengard> |
Component: | Acquisitions | Assignee: | Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart> |
Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | jonathan.druart, kohapatch, sandboxes, sfayle, tomascohen |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: | ||
Circulation function: | |||
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 24277, 29175 | ||
Attachments: |
Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable
Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable [PASSED QA] Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Bug 8417: Fix test |
Description
Nicole C. Engard
2012-07-11 13:04:22 UTC
Created attachment 37404 [details] [review] Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Currently the date of the order reception is the date of shipping date, which is wrong. This patch makes this date editable (with default is today). Test plan: 1/ Create an order and receive it 2/ Confirm that you can edit the reception date and it's take into account as the datereceived. 37404 - Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Apply? [(y)es, (n)o, (i)nteractive] y Applying: Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable fatal: sha1 information is lacking or useless (acqui/orderreceive.pl). Repository lacks necessary blobs to fall back on 3-way merge. Cannot fall back to three-way merge. Patch failed at 0001 Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable When you have resolved this problem run "git bz apply --continue". If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git bz apply --skip". To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git bz apply --abort". Patch left in /tmp/Bug-8417-Make-the-order-receive-date-editable-OHt7MP.patch Created attachment 38275 [details] [review] Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Currently the date of the order reception is the date of shipping date, which is wrong. This patch makes this date editable (with default is today). Test plan: 1/ Create an order and receive it 2/ Confirm that you can edit the reception date and it's take into account as the datereceived. Patch tested with a sandbox, by Aleisha <aleishaamohia@hotmail.com> Created attachment 38300 [details] [review] Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Currently the date of the order reception is the date of shipping date, which is wrong. This patch makes this date editable (with default is today). Test plan: 1/ Create an order and receive it 2/ Confirm that you can edit the reception date and it's take into account as the datereceived. Signed-off-by: Aleisha <aleishaamohia@hotmail.com> I like the idea of this! 1) Should we hide the field for AcqCreateItem = 'cataloguing'? And maybe also 'receive'? (normal) 2) I wonder if there is a use case a library might want to keep the initial order date instead. The way this patch works they can't see the initial date and they can't keep it. (question) 3) Currently the field is named 'Date received', maybe we should use the description of the item field it updates - 'Date acquired' to make the use more clear? (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #6) > I like the idea of this! > > 1) Should we hide the field for AcqCreateItem = 'cataloguing'? And maybe > also 'receive'? (normal) It's not a new field, and it needs to be filled. I think we should keep it. > 2) I wonder if there is a use case a library might want to keep the initial > order date instead. The way this patch works they can't see the initial date > and they can't keep it. (question) They can manually change it. We could fix this workflow later if someone ask for it. > 3) Currently the field is named 'Date received', maybe we should use the > description of the item field it updates - 'Date acquired' to make the use > more clear? I am not sure to understand, the date is used to fill aqorders.datereceived. "Date received" seems to fit quite well :) Oh! I thought in my tests it influenced the items.dateaccessioned. Is that possible? (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #8) > Oh! I thought in my tests it influenced the items.dateaccessioned. Is that > possible? I think this is set to today before and after the patch. But I didn't test. Sending back to the Needs QA queue. Created attachment 42772 [details] [review] Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Currently the date of the order reception is the date of shipping date, which is wrong. This patch makes this date editable (with default is today). Test plan: 1/ Create an order and receive it 2/ Confirm that you can edit the reception date and it's take into account as the datereceived. Signed-off-by: Aleisha <aleishaamohia@hotmail.com> Created attachment 43527 [details] [review] [PASSED QA] Bug 8417: Make the order receive date editable Currently the date of the order reception is the date of shipping date, which is wrong. This patch makes this date editable (with default is today). Test plan: 1/ Create an order and receive it 2/ Confirm that you can edit the reception date and it's take into account as the datereceived. Signed-off-by: Aleisha <aleishaamohia@hotmail.com> Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com> Patch pushed to master. Thanks Jonathan! Created attachment 43652 [details] [review] Bug 8417: Fix test ModReceiveOrder now excepts a date formatted following the dateformat pref. If nothing is given, default is now. |