Bug 26135 - MARCItemFieldsToOrder should allow use of items table field names
Summary: MARCItemFieldsToOrder should allow use of items table field names
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Acquisitions (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low normal
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-08-04 12:37 UTC by Andrew Fuerste-Henry
Modified: 2025-02-12 13:29 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

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


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andrew Fuerste-Henry 2020-08-04 12:37:57 UTC
In the syspref description for MARCItemFieldsToOrder, one is instructed to enter database field names. However, the syspref requires one to use "LOC" rather than the field name "location" for shelving location. We should use "location" here.
Comment 1 Andrew Fuerste-Henry 2025-02-12 13:29:34 UTC
I'm renaming this bug and redirecting it a bit. All of the values one can map in MARCItemFieldsToOrder directly correspond to database fields, but a few of them use names that differ slightly from those fields. This has been an ongoing source of confusion.

Can we make MARCItemFieldsToOrder work with *either* the current order object names *or* the database field names?

The syspref wants: nonpublic_note, public_note, loc, and copyno

The items table names those: itemnotes_nonpublic, itemnotes, location, and copynumber

All other potential values listed in the syspref description match their corresponding database fields.

Currently on main, either "loc" or "location" work when enter in MARCItemFieldsToOrder, but itemnotes, itemnotes_nonpublic, and copynumber do not work.