--- Comment #225 from Benjamin Rokseth <> 
Seems the behaviour is intentional:
method forced_hold_level is implemented in Koha/ and used in
reserve/ by this patch set, and is also commented:

>If a patron has multiple holds for a single record,
>those holds must be either all record level holds,
>or they must all be item level holds.
>This method should be used with Hold sets where all
>Hold objects share the same patron and record.
>This method will return 'item' if the patron has
>at least one item level hold. It will return 'record'
>if the patron has holds but none are item level,
>Finally, if the patron has no holds, it will return
>undef which indicateds the patron may select either
>record or item level holds, barring any other rules
>that would prevent one or the other.

but I'm not sure of the implementation since it seems to favour 'record' in any
other case than existing item level hold?

You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
Koha-bugs mailing list
website :
git :
bugs :

Reply via email to