http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9180
Katrin Fischer <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Signed Off |Failed QA --- Comment #18 from Katrin Fischer <[email protected]> --- Hi Sophie, I have tested this twice, but I think there is still a bug/regression in this: Test user from library A has checked out - various books from library A and B in A - books from libary B in B ./misc/cronjobs/overdue_notices.pl -t -v Tests: Overdue notice triggers 1) only defined for default/all libraries - with and without patch: 2 notices are generated. Both generated notices contain a complete list of overdue items from both branches. 2) defined for default/all libraries and library C - without patch: no notice is generated - with patch: 2 notices are generated. 3) defined for default/all libraries and library A - without patch: only a notice for library A is generated - with patch: 2 notices are generated. 4) only defined for library A - with and without patch: only 1 notice is generated for library A 5) defined for library A and B, no default rule - without patch: 2 messages are generated - with patch: only 1 message is generated For this bug: 2) seems ok with the patch, but we seem to introduce a regression on 5). In general: Should the item lists be identical for the patches? I think it would only make sense if each overdue notice contained a complementary list of items. But should they be divided by checkout library/homebranch? Should it be controlled by one of the existing preferences (CircControl or HomeOrHoldingBranch)? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://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/
