---- Reported by firstname.lastname@example.org 2006-05-31 06:38:29 ----
I have expanded the IndependantBranches code in our installation. It does things like not show copies at other branches when a search is done.
keeps track of which branch is being viewed in issueingrules.pl.
reduce options in certain drop downs related to branches or patrons.
show only members at the users branch when searching for members.
dictionary only returns results where there is a copy at the users branch.
Others may like this sort of thing too.
---- Additional Comments From email@example.com 2006-05-31 06:38:45 ----
Created an attachment
---- Additional Comments From firstname.lastname@example.org 2006-06-01 06:56:51 ----
Another thing this patch does is a modification to getiteminformation, which is used when issueing copies and other places. With Independant Branches on the item information is branch dependent, so there can be copies with the same barcode as long as they are at different branches. This makes migrating an existing library easier as you then don't have to re-barcode all the books. Which is exactly the reason I made this change for our installation.
--- Bug imported by email@example.com 2010-05-20 23:38 UTC ---
This bug was previously known as _bug_ 1088 at http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=1088
Imported an attachment (id=64)
Actual time not defined. Setting to 0.0
The original submitter of attachment 64 [details] [review] is unknown.
Reassigning to the person who moved it here: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Comment on attachment 64 [details] [review]
Marking this patch obsolete, as it's not a Git patch, and seems based on Koha 2.2.5
My suggestion here would be to clarify exactly "Independant Branches" should mean. There are several different functions that library networks may or may not want to enable:
* Hiding other branches' materials in Search (either at first, or completely)
* Hiding other branches' patrons in Patron Search (either at first, or completely)
* Hiding other branches' reports, lists, etc
* Prevent other branches from editing your items
* Prevent other branches from editing your settings
* Prevent other branches from editing your patrons
* Prevent other branches from editing your reports, lists, etc.
We're close on the first section, through various mechanisms.
The second session looks more like individual permissions, rather than global sysprefs. For example, we'd want certain privileged individuals to be able to edit EVERYTHING (even if that's only one admin account).
Is this bug still necessary?
I think this bug is too unspecific and could only be an omnibus bug of some kind. I am adding Kyle as he has been working in this area recently, maybe there is some inspiration to be found, but closing it in favor of newer bug reports.
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #4)
> I think this bug is too unspecific and could only be an omnibus bug of some
> kind. I am adding Kyle as he has been working in this area recently, maybe
> there is some inspiration to be found, but closing it in favor of newer bug