Bug 34190 - Record overlay rule ignored on z39.50 import in Advanced Editor
Summary: Record overlay rule ignored on z39.50 import in Advanced Editor
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Cataloging (show other bugs)
Version: 22.11
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2023-07-03 17:04 UTC by Esther Melander
Modified: 2024-05-10 07:07 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:
Circulation function:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Esther Melander 2023-07-03 17:04:19 UTC
To recreate:

1. Create a Record overlay rule with Source, z39.50, 500, protect, skip, skip, skip, skip.
2. Edit a biblio in the Advanced Editor.
3. Make sure the record contains a 500 tag with text. Save
4. Use advanced search to find a replacement bibliographic record - substitute.
5. Notice the 500 field may now be missing.
6. Save the record.

The 500 field, which was protected, is not restored upon saving.

The record overlay rules for z39.50 should work for both the basic and advanced editors.

The Advanced search in the Advanced Editor appears to function as the Replace record via z39.50 in the basic editor and should behave similarly when applying overlay rules.
Comment 1 holly 2024-05-08 17:41:06 UTC
This is also not working in basic editor. 

Recreate using Esther's plan above with the basic editor.
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2024-05-09 07:12:48 UTC
(In reply to holly from comment #1)
> This is also not working in basic editor. 
> 
> Recreate using Esther's plan above with the basic editor.

This is worrying. Can you check if you might have had 2 different rules for 500 defined? Also your exact version?

Bug 30966
And then there is: Bug 33268
Comment 3 holly 2024-05-09 21:40:04 UTC
Sorry for creating confusion. My comment is not relevant. I found and am commenting on the actual bug 34191
Comment 4 Katrin Fischer 2024-05-10 07:07:41 UTC
With all those very similar bugs I believe it just shows there is an urgent need for some clean-up!