Hi All,
I made some suggestions (below) for how to move a couple things around on
the wiki and no one commented. This is your last call to tell me not to do
it or to provide an even better idea...
Lori
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Lori Bowen Ayre wrote:
> Fantastic, Dan!
>
> It would also
Hello Lori,
I have moved the technical aspects of this discussion over to the Dev list. I
fully expect we will be able to make this happen for 2.2. If you are not on
the Dev list, you can follow the discussion here:
http://list.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-dev/2011-July/007411.html
I'm wishing we had a "like" button right now.
Lori
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Boggs, John wrote:
> I’ve noticed the last few weeks that I’m getting a lot more traffic from
> the Evergreen mailing list than from the Innovative Users Group list. While
> I suppose it could be due to the f
I support this idea as well. How could we move the idea forward enough
that I could shop the project around for other developers to help us with
it?
Lori
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:57 AM, David Fiander wrote:
> I would definitely support a pluggable authentication system, since
> different c
> >> Filter Field: Call #/Volume
> >> No operator matches the given name and argument type(s). You
>
> I think in this case you almost certainly want a field for
> the call number that has the word Label in it. That'd be
> straight-up text you could use a substring against.
Opps, yeah using t
Thanks - I will give that a try!
Geoff
>>> "Whalen, Liam" 7/27/2011 3:24 PM
>>>
>> -Original Message-
>> What Operator are you using to check the Call Number range,
>> and what range are you using for you Call Numbers
>
> Base Filters:
> Filter Field: Call #/Volume
> Field transform:
>> Filter Field: Call #/Volume
>> No operator matches the given name and argument type(s). You
> I am not sure what that error means. However, you could limit your search to
> fields containing just 'LT' that should retrieve both LT and LT-. If that
> doesn't work, you could change the operator
>> -Original Message-
>> What Operator are you using to check the Call Number range,
>> and what range are you using for you Call Numbers
>
> Base Filters:
> Filter Field: Call #/Volume
> Field transform: Raw Data
> Operator: Contain matching substring
>
> Because we chose the operator:
Hi,
What Operator are you using to check the Call Number range, and what
range are you using for you Call Numbers
Base Filters:
Filter Field: Call #/Volume
Field transform: Raw Data
Operator: Contain matching substring
Because we chose the operator: contain matching substring we are
searching
I would definitely support a pluggable authentication system, since
different communities may use different authentication systems.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 13:59, Galen Charlton wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 07/27/2011 12:27 PM, Dan Wells wrote:
>
>> There may be other cases where "Patch Available" woul
> -Original Message-
> We are trying to generate a report which will give us the
> total # of circulations for a specific year for a specific
> call number range (total number of circs of Laptops for
> 2009). I have tried to adapt some of the existing templates
> however keep on gettin
I've noticed the last few weeks that I'm getting a lot more traffic from the
Evergreen mailing list than from the Innovative Users Group list. While I
suppose it could be due to the fact that Innovative has lots of academic
customers & it's summer, I like to think it's because there's just more
Hi,
We are trying to generate a report which will give us the total # of
circulations for a specific year for a specific call number range (total number
of circs of Laptops for 2009). I have tried to adapt some of the existing
templates however keep on getting blank spreadsheets.
Any advice
Hi,
On 07/27/2011 12:27 PM, Dan Wells wrote:
There may be other cases where "Patch Available" would make sense, but at
least for this case, I think "Under Development" is our best bet (if such a
category already exists). The patch which is available is quite old, and is
really more of a startin
Hello Lori,
There may be other cases where "Patch Available" would make sense, but at
least for this case, I think "Under Development" is our best bet (if such a
category already exists). The patch which is available is quite old, and is
really more of a starting point than something which can si
Maybe we need to create new category called "Patch Available" or something
like that?
Lori
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Anoop Atre wrote:
> As a middle ground I'd say it's "Under Development" and once accepted into
> the core (or should it be when available in a release version) we set it t
As a middle ground I'd say it's "Under Development" and once accepted
into the core (or should it be when available in a release version) we
set it to "Supported".
Cheers
On 07/27/2011 10:41 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Lori Bowen Ayre wrote:
Yes, thanks for the cl
Thank you! Will update SA537 to Not Supported!
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Lori Bowen Ayre
> wrote:
> > Yes, thanks for the clarification Dan. So, based on what you've said,
> I'm
> > updating the Evergreen feature summary some of us a
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Lori Bowen Ayre wrote:
> Yes, thanks for the clarification Dan. So, based on what you've said, I'm
> updating the Evergreen feature summary some of us are working on to "LDAP
> supported." I've added it as feature SA537 (System Admin 537) in case
> anyone wants
Hi Dan,
This is wonderful! I, for one, would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks!
Gordana
>>> "Dan Wells" 7/26/2011 6:34 PM >>>
Hello Gordana,
We are currently using LDAP to authenticate. I may be mistaken, but I believe
the code attached to the following message is still our current version, wi
20 matches
Mail list logo
