---- Reported by email@example.com 2009-10-14 12:53:22 ----
A new script should be created to show users the recent acquisitions in opac AND intranet.
---- Additional Comments From firstname.lastname@example.org 2009-10-14 13:02:37 ----
How would this be different than doing a regular search and ordering the results by acquisition date?
---- Additional Comments From email@example.com 2009-10-14 13:49:33 ----
Created an attachment
---- Additional Comments From firstname.lastname@example.org 2009-10-14 13:50:32 ----
I invite you to look my patch.
---- Additional Comments From email@example.com 2010-02-06 23:30:14 ----
Will this make it into 3.2? Looks awesome but I don't see it right now.
---- Additional Comments From firstname.lastname@example.org 2010-02-08 12:58:39 ----
(In reply to comment #1)
> How would this be different than doing a regular search and ordering the
> results by acquisition date?
Nahuel: Owen's question is a good one - please answer.
---- Additional Comments From email@example.com 2010-02-08 13:03:42 ----
While it may not be different it's easier I think for librarians - and it's something people ask for and don't like when we say you can just do a search :)
I'll let Nahuel answer the technical aspects of this question.
---- Additional Comments From firstname.lastname@example.org 2010-02-08 13:58:13 ----
Not only for librarians, but for borrowers too, I don't know if my mother is able to understand that sorting by acqdate exist, because she don't look all the interface, just what she needs.
This add a button for recent acquisition, it's a bit more user friendly, and technically this doesn't implies you have to do the right koha2marc mapping.
---- Additional Comments From email@example.com 2010-02-08 14:33:47 ----
I am not inclined to push this as is. I have no objection to adding an easier user interface to display recent purchase, nor do I have any objection to creating a syspref to allow the library to just turn on such a display with no fuss, but this patch has serious flaws:
* GetBiblioSummary - I will not push this as it stands now: we have at last count *three* systems for mapping MARC records and displaying them, none of which require hard-coding HTML and MARC tags. To repeat: there is no excuse for hard-coding HTML in C4 routines.
* SearchAcquisitions - indexing dateaccessioned and using Zebra (or NoZebra) would suffice. I see no reason for a new search routine.
--- Bug imported by firstname.lastname@example.org 2010-05-21 01:14 UTC ---
This bug was previously known as _bug_ 3710 at http://bugs.koha.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=3710
Imported an attachment (id=1533)
Actual time not defined. Setting to 0.0
The original submitter of attachment 1533 [details] [review] is unknown.
Reassigning to the person who moved it here: email@example.com.
Removing "PATCH-sent" priority since the submitted patch isn't getting approved.
I think we have a problem here.
The files and the feature exist in 3.0.x, but not in 3.2:
I can't test the feature, but a user was reporting problems with it on IRC today, using 3.0.5:
Repeating myself, because qa contact was missing in the bug:
I think we have a bigger problem here.
The files and the feature exist in 3.0.x, but not in 3.2.
Problem is still not resolved, there is no recent acquisitions feature in current master.
The attached patch needs to be rewritten completely for our current templating system to adapt to all the changes made since the patch was created and to solve the issues noted by Galen.
The updatedatabase shows +$DBversion = "3.01.00.116";
I am marking this WONTFIX.