In the issues table date_due is a datetime field. If you do not have hourly loans, the 23:59:00 on the CHECKOUT notice may be somewhat confusing. (When does the library close?) In the patch submitted I virtually add a date_due_without_time column to the issues table by adding such a field in the SELECT statement in Letters.pm, routine _parseletter_sth. If you want to remove the time from the notice, now you can just edit the notice and replace <<issues.date_due>> by <<issues.date_due_without_time>>.
Created attachment 35033 [details] [review] Bug 13536: Remove time from CHECKOUT notice In the issues table date_due is a datetime field. If you do not have hourly loans, the 23:59:00 on the CHECKOUT notice may be somewhat confusing. (When does the library close?) In the patch submitted I virtually add a date_due_without_time column to the issues table by adding such a field in the SELECT statement in Letters.pm, routine _parseletter_sth. If you want to remove the time from the notice, now you can just edit the notice and replace <<issues.date_due>> by <<issues.date_due_without_time>>. Test plan: [1] Edit CHECKOUT notice as described above. [2] Check out a book to a patron (notice enabled in his messaging prefs). [3] Check the notice: Do you only see the date, not the time?
Can't see <<issues.date_due_without_time>> to replace <<issues.date_due>> when editing the notice - setting to Failed QA
Created attachment 35443 [details] [review] Bug 13536: Follow-up for adding date_due_without_time in column list This patch adds the ("virtual") column date_due_without_time to the list of available columns when editing a notice (for the issues table). Test plan: Add the column to the CHECKOUT notice. Verify that the actual notice at checkout now contains the expected data. Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> I also tested this by adding the field to DUE and running the overdues cron job. Note that in that case it must be included in an <item> section. (This is a restriction imposed by the code in the overdue_notices.pl script.)
(In reply to Aleisha Amohia from comment #2) > Can't see <<issues.date_due_without_time>> to replace <<issues.date_due>> > when editing the notice - setting to Failed QA Thanks, Aleisha for testing. Hopefully, you still have the time to check the follow-up ..
Created attachment 35453 [details] [review] Bug 13536: Follow-up for adding date_due_without_time in column list This patch adds the ("virtual") column date_due_without_time to the list of available columns when editing a notice (for the issues table). Test plan: Add the column to the CHECKOUT notice. Verify that the actual notice at checkout now contains the expected data. Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> I also tested this by adding the field to DUE and running the overdues cron job. Note that in that case it must be included in an <item> section. (This is a restriction imposed by the code in the overdue_notices.pl script.) Signed-off-by: Aleisha <aleishaamohia@hotmail.com>
Created attachment 35507 [details] [review] Bug 13536 [Proposed Followup] - Use multi-select
Marcel, don't you think it could be better to let the choice to the user? We could imagine a filter like <<my_table.my_date_field | date_without_time>>. Like that we could have a global solution, for all fields, not only for date_due.
(In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #7) > Marcel, don't you think it could be better to let the choice to the user? We > could imagine a filter like <<my_table.my_date_field | date_without_time>>. > Like that we could have a global solution, for all fields, not only for > date_due. The user cannot choose now: he gets the time inclusive. I offer him the choice of removing the time with the new field. I would welcome a global solution. This is indeed quite ad-hoc (like more things in Koha, so very consistent :) Building a filter option in the notices would take more time. Actually, we could consider building the notices through TT and add translation as well..
(In reply to M. de Rooy from comment #8) > I would welcome a global solution. I had a try on bug 13622, feedback welcomed ;)
I think the best solution would be to automatically strip times from items due at 23:59 Would this not solve the issue completely without the need for any special markup? (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #9) > (In reply to M. de Rooy from comment #8) > > I would welcome a global solution. > > I had a try on bug 13622, feedback welcomed ;)
(In reply to Kyle M Hall from comment #10) > I think the best solution would be to automatically strip times from items > due at 23:59 Could be. But imo it is in the same ad-hoc category as the proposed solution.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 13622 ***