Bug 24437 - Circulation Rules are not Respecting Correct Rule if Library is Using Hard Due Dates
Summary: Circulation Rules are not Respecting Correct Rule if Library is Using Hard Du...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 23382
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Circulation (show other bugs)
Version: 19.05
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low critical (vote)
Assignee: Nick Clemens
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-01-16 16:49 UTC by Kelly McElligott
Modified: 2020-01-17 20:33 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Kelly McElligott 2020-01-16 16:49:01 UTC
If a library has a circulation rule specific to their library and contains a Hard Due Date and also a circulation rule with a hard due date (set in the past) in the "Standard" set of rules, Koha is calling the standard rule first and then when prompted with a Yellow Box to enter a due date, if hit "Yes", Koha will then call the right rule (library-specific rule).

Test:
1. Have a rule set up in a library-specific branch set with Hard Due Before Date in Future
2. Have the same rule set up in the standard set of rules with a Hard Due date set in the past.
3. Check out a book in the library that there is a library-specific rule.
4. Koha will call the standard set of rules, will be unable to assign a due date since it is in the past and present a library with a yellow box to enter a date.
5. If library hits YES without setting a date, Koha will call the due date using the correct (library-specific rules).
Comment 1 Nick Clemens 2020-01-16 17:49:35 UTC
Issue here is fixed in bug 23382 - either it shoudl eb backported or we should cherry pick from commit f8e2c489cb668aab9e7484c2dd67c1c05f37b2a5
Comment 2 Nick Clemens 2020-01-17 20:33:43 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 23382 ***