Jason, Easier sharing would be very nice. We would like to be able to rename buckets. We would also like the bucket list, both in the interface and the list of bucket to choose when adding to it, to be in alphabetical order. We would like to be able to scan items directly into a bucket.
If you remove items or titles from a bucket, you have to refresh several times in order for them to actually be removed. I have not tested to see if the removed title can still be merged. Also, you often have to refresh several times to get titles added to the buckets to show up in the bucket. If they are not displaying in the bucket, when you click on merge titles, they won't be one of the records to be merged and won't merge. But will display in the bucket if syncing is resolved. (I reported this bug sometime ago, but not under the current helpdesk system so it probably has been lost. It is something I intend to report but have not had the time to write up yet). Elaine J. Elaine Hardy PINES Bibliographic Projects & Metadata Manager Georgia Public Library Service 1800 Century Place, Ste 150 Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304 404.235-7128 404.235-7201, fax eha...@georgialibraries.org www.georgialibraries.org www.georgialibraries.org/pines ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Etheridge" <ja...@esilibrary.com> To: "Evergreen Discussion Group" <open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org> Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2009 12:34:00 PM Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Buckets On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Hardy, Elaine <eha...@georgialibraries.org> wrote: > Personally, there are other problems with buckets that are much more > pressing that I would rather have handled than this. Hey Elaine, I'm just sounding folks out, not necessarily committing any of my free time to development on these things. The set versus non-set question came up when we were first implementing buckets; I'd like to see if conditions have changed. What sort of problems are you thinking of? The big one in my mind is that buckets are manipulated locally on the client side and that's just not scalable past a hundred or so items the way things are implemented now. However, there is sponsored work going on right now for implementing the server-side "meat grinders" that we always wanted for batch changes on the server-side. That's exciting. I'd also like to see better mechanisms for sharing and managing buckets, and an easy way to turn a bucket into a book bag and vice versa (they're implemented the same way in the database). I also want to finish the experiment with the search mechanism embedded in the record buckets interface. What I'd _really_ love to see is a way for patrons to "consume" bookbags that are shared by other patrons. For example, if I could pass you a URL for one of my bookbags, and you could magically copy that into a personal bookbag of your own, that would be awesome. -- Jason Etheridge | VP, Tactical Development | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Evergreen Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: ja...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com Please join us for the Evergreen 2010 International Conference, April 20-23, 2010 at the Amway Grand Hotel and Convention Center, Grand Rapids, Michigan. http://www.evergreen2010.org/
