Bug 8101 - DataTables in Acquisision module: orderreceive.tt
Summary: DataTables in Acquisision module: orderreceive.tt
Status: CLOSED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Acquisitions (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Jonathan Druart
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on: 8240
Blocks: 5345
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2012-05-16 11:51 UTC by Jonathan Druart
Modified: 2014-12-07 20:02 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

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


Attachments
orderreceive.tt (2.13 KB, patch)
2012-05-16 11:57 UTC, Jonathan Druart
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
orderreceive.tt (2.33 KB, patch)
2012-05-16 12:34 UTC, Jonathan Druart
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
orderreceive.tt (2.29 KB, patch)
2012-06-07 11:50 UTC, Jonathan Druart
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jonathan Druart 2012-05-16 11:51:19 UTC
DataTables in Acquisision module: orderreceive.tt
Comment 1 Jonathan Druart 2012-05-16 11:57:59 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 2 Jonathan Druart 2012-05-16 12:34:09 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Jonathan Druart 2012-06-07 11:50:33 UTC
Created attachment 9971 [details] [review]
orderreceive.tt

rebased patch
Comment 4 Katrin Fischer 2012-06-11 11:33:54 UTC
Hi Jonathan, 
I am looking at this with Sophie and I have no idea how to get to that page from the acquisition module - can you help us?
Comment 5 Jonathan Druart 2012-06-11 12:25:56 UTC
Humm, indeed, that is strange.

The table is displayed if there are several orders for one ordernumber (??).
I don't know how it is possible.

Perhaps it is a dead code.
Comment 6 Katrin Fischer 2012-06-11 12:28:15 UTC
Perhaps it is - I think it might not be referenced anywhere with the right parameters to get to that view. Can we check that and perhaps mark the bug INVALID if it's the case? (also removing the code maybe, but not sure if it's something that should be brought back or is not working with new acq)
Comment 7 Jonathan Druart 2012-06-12 07:52:34 UTC
See Bug 8240 (remove dead code)