Bug 6382 - Automatic Status Changing on Check In
Summary: Automatic Status Changing on Check In
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 11629
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Circulation (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Kyle M Hall
QA Contact: Bugs List
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-05-20 17:08 UTC by Nicole C. Engard
Modified: 2014-11-02 11:34 UTC (History)
3 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 Nicole C. Engard 2011-05-20 17:08:14 UTC
Submitted on behalf of Henry Bankhead in search of feedback:

We are used to being able to change at items "status" w/ horizon by just checking it in. Think of the not for loan status for example. So, if it was in mending or workroom and was checked in it would become available. Also if it was in receives status, it would move to cataloging and then to in if you checked it in twice. Originally I though Koha did this because the not for loan "status"s have numerical values. So I assumed they would move from -1, to -1, to zero (available) but evidently this is not the case. 

Can you see that this would be highly desirable from a workflow standpoint? What would it take to make Koha do this?
Comment 1 Owen Leonard 2013-08-05 19:37:15 UTC
This would be completely contrary to the way my library uses the notforloan status. I think you'd have to design a system which allowed you to create specific status workflows: "If item with status A is checked in, move to status B, if item with status B is checked in, move to status C." I think that's the only way you could make it flexible enough that libraries who are used to Koha's existing workflow wouldn't object.
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2013-08-08 00:26:42 UTC
I agree with Owen that this would need to be configurable and not changing current workflows.
Comment 3 Katrin Fischer 2014-11-02 11:34:39 UTC
Bug 11629 should be helpful here :)

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 11629 ***