>>> Sounds like a good possibility. I just wonder how (or if) you could tease >>> apart transactions that happened after the merger, particularly if there is >>> more than one active card attached to the record, and the transactions >>> happened after retrieving the user by name or other access point so you >>> don't know for sure which card to attach the new transactions to. >> >> [splitting users by splitting cards, and which card to put new transactions >> on] >> However, if the patron was retrieved by a different >> means, it'd be a bit klunky/inelegant to ask staff which card is being >> used for that session. > > Sounds like another use for actor.usr.card. ;)
Well, the whole point of unmerging patrons is to fix a mistake, and if you've mistakenly merged two patrons, then what are the odds of post-merge-pre-unmerge transactions going onto the right card whenever the actual physical card is not present? Selecting one with actor.usr.card doesn't seem to improve the odds by itself. -- Jason Etheridge | VP, Community Support and Advocacy | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Evergreen Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
