https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=20955
--- Comment #31 from David Cook <[email protected]> --- I think you could argue that a hold is a hold though... and having untrappable holds is a bug. But then you look at C4::Circulation and it's like... yeah... changing C4::Reserves::CheckReserves would break a lot of things. It's just not as straightforward as a person would think. The design is just problematic in a number of ways. (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #22) > I think that makes sense. Maybe instead of just a boolean flag we will want > to note why kind of hold policy was overriden. > If it was an override of the max holds it has a different effect (now too) > as if it was an override of an item that is usually not holdable at all. I don't know that this is possible because there might be a number of policies to override and I don't think we'd get all the violations to list. (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #26) > The "max holds" create no issues afaik as the hold will trigger and behave > normally. But if you place a hold on an unholdable item, the hold won't > trigger currently, so these are probably the ones we want to target here. Ahhh right... If we have item in hand... but if it violates a place-based policy.... or a circ rule (ie my $branchitemrule = C4::Circulation::GetBranchItemRule( $branch, $item->effective_itemtype );)... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
