Rollback should really be the last statement.
I am leaving get_from_storage here, but add a comment that it seems
unneeded at this moment. The Koha::Account::Offset->new and
C4::Stats::UpdateStats wont change the line.. But since the distance
in code is becoming a bit larger, I wont complain.
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Hooks added:
after_account_action with new action add_credit
How to test:
Run tests in t/db_dependent/Koha/Plugins/Account_hooks.t
Sponsored by: Gothenburg University Library
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
On bug 29697, an explicit call to 'warn' was added, but no tests were
added for that behavior.
This patch adds that.
To test:
1. Run:
$ kshell
k$ prove t/db_dependent/Koha/Biblio/Metadata.t
=> FAIL: There's a warn, no tests for it :-(
2. Apply this patch
3. Repeat 1
=> SUCCESS: A new test was added, no more warns printed
4. Sign off :-D
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This patch simplipfies the tests, and highlighs the fact the introduced
method should add filters to the current resultset.
It also aligns the tests with the currently adopted style.
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Test plan:
1. Make sure syspref "opacbookbag" is set to "Allow".
2. Make sure syspref "HoldsNeedProcessingSIP" is set to "Don't fulfill".
3. Place a hold on an item.
4. Return item via SIP at the pickup library.
5. View biblio in Opac.
6. Note that it says "Available" as status.
7. Add biblio to Cart.
8. Open Cart.
9. Note that it says "Available" as status.
10. Apply patch.
11. Reload Opac page.
12. It should now say "On hold".
13. Reload Card page.
14. It should also say "On hold".
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Fuerste-Henry <andrew@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Rebecca Coert <rcoert@arlingtonva.us>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Test plan:
Run t/db_dependent/Koha/Biblio/Metadata.t
Fails with:
not ok 10 - 951-952s-953 in 245,100,942,951,953,999,952,952,952,952,952,952,952,952
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
If not counting patrons holds, found or unfound, we no longer need this option
introduced by bug 28078
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This patch makes three changes:
1 - The borrower's own holds are not counted towards HighHolds limit
2 - We exclude all hold counts from CanItemBeReserved
3 - Static mode should only decrease hold when over the decreaseLoanHighHoldsValue, not when equal
Previously a patron's hold could put the count over the threshhold, and
if the patron is only allowed 1 hold per record, and the hold wasn't found before
the checkout, it would make all items unholdable, thus lowering the theshhold for
dynamic HighHolds
To test:
1 - Set sysaprefs:
decreaseLoanHighHolds - enable
decreaseLoanHighHoldsDuration - 1
decreaseLoanHighHoldsValue - 1
decreaseLoanHighHoldsControl - "over the number of holdable items on the record" / dynamic
decreaseLoanHighHoldsIgnoreStatuses - blank
2 - Set circ rules to allow 1 hold per record and loan period of 5
3 - Find/create a record with 3 items
4 - Place a title level hold for two different patrons
5 - Attempt to checkout item - note warning about high holds
6 - Cancel checkout
7 - Set decreaseLoanHighHoldsControl - "on the record" / static
8 - Attempt checkout - note warning about high holds
9 - Apply patch
10 - Checkout item - no warning
11 - checkin item, replace hold
12 - Set decreaseLoanHighHoldsControl - "over the number of holdable items on the record" / dynamic
13 - Checkout item - no warning
14 - prove t/db_dependent/DecreaseLoanHighHolds.t
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This shows that HomeOrHoldingBranch syspref is incorrectly not used by
_CalculateAndUpdateFine() when it decides which circ rule to use.
Run "prove t/db_dependent/Circulation/_CalculateAndUpdateFine.t" to
notice the tests now fail.
Signed-off-by: Petro Vashchuk <stalkernoid@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This shows that HomeOrHoldingBranch syspref is incorrectly not used by
TooMany() when it decides which circ rule to use.
Run "prove t/db_dependent/Circulation/TooMany.t" to notice the tests
now fail.
Signed-off-by: Petro Vashchuk <stalkernoid@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Test plan:
Run without next patch. Should fail.
Run with next patch. Should pass.
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
https://bugs.koha-community.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
Make use of Koha::Cache::Memory::Lite to avoid hitting the database and
creating plugins object for every call to Koha::Plugins->call
Test plan:
1. Make sure plugins still work by executing
`prove t/db_dependent/Koha/Plugins/Plugins.t`
2. Run the test script provided in the following patch to see how it
affects performances
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This patch adds test data to prove that all authorizations
for subpermissions are set when only a top level flag is set.
To test:
0) Apply patch
1) prove ./t/Koha/Auth/Permissions.t
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This patch ensures HoldFeeMode is considered when displaying a message
to patrons on the OPAC that says they'll be charged a hold fee when
placing or collecting the hold.
When HoldFeeMode is set to not_always or "only if all items are checked
out and the record has at least one hold already" then the hold fee
message should only show if all items on the record are checked out, AND
the record has at least one hold already - both of these conditions must
be met.
To test:
1. Go to Administration -> Patron categories
2. Edit your patron category and give a hold fee of $1.
3. Go to Administration -> System preferences and search for
HoldFeeMode. Set to 'only if all items are checked out and the record
has at least one hold already' if not already set. Keep this tab open.
4. In another tab, open the OPAC.
5. Search the OPAC for a record with one item which is NOT checked out.
6. Go to place a hold on this record. Confirm you see a message saying
that you will be charged a hold fee, even though not all items are
checked out and the record does not have a hold --> This is the bug.
7. Apply patch and restart services.
Items available, no holds placed
8. Repeat steps 5-6. This time, you should NOT see the hold fee message.
Items available, holds placed
9. In your staff interface tab, find the same record.
10. Place a hold for a different patron on this record.
11. In your OPAC tab, find this record again and go to place a hold. You
should NOT see the hold fee message.
No items available, no holds placed
12. In your staff interface tab, cancel the hold placed on this record.
13. Check out the item to a different patron.
14. In your OPAC tab, find this record again and go to place a hold. You
should NOT see the hold fee message.
No items available, holds placed
15. In your staff interface tab, keep the item checked out to another
patron.
16. Place a hold for a third patron on this record.
17. In your OPAC tab, find this record again and go to place a hold. You
SHOULD see the hold fee message.
Multiple holds
18. Search the OPAC for a record. Make sure your search will return more
than one result, including our test record.
19. Check the checkbox for our test record, plus another record where
the item is not checked out.
20. Click the Place hold button to place holds on all of our selected
records. You should only see the hold fee message above our test record.
21. In your staff interface tab, test setting HoldFeeMode to the other
values and confirm the hold message shows on the OPAC as expected.
22. Confirm tests pass t/db_dependent/Reserves/GetReserveFee.t
Sponsored-by: Horowhenua Libraries Trust
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This will fix t/db_dependent/www/batch.t and t/db_dependent/www/search_utf8.t
QA - improvement ideas welcome! It's definitely not the best we can do.
Test plan:
prove t/db_dependent/www/search_utf8.t t/db_dependent/www/batch.t
must return green
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
With the follow-up changes, the return value is no longer a scalar, but
a hashref, but the tests weren't updated accordingly.
This patch fixes this situation.
To test:
1. Run:
$ kshell
k$ prove t/db_dependent/Koha/Item.t
=> FAIL: Tests fail
2. Apply this patch
3. Repeat 1
=> SUCCESS: Tests pass!
4. Sign off :-D
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This can be used to instruct staff how the item should handled when
it's checked in. For example items notforloan status has been
changed as "Invoiced item" while item has been on loan. When it's
checked in staff sees that they should put item aside for further
processing.
To test:
1. Apply patch and update database if needed
2. Set items notforloan status as -1 (or create new one)
3. Add line "-1: ONLYMESSAGE" to UpdateNotForLoanStatusOnCheckin
4. Check item out for patron.
5. Check item in.
=> Description of notforloan status should be displayed.
=> Confirm notforloan status hasn't changed.
Also prove t/db_dependent/Circulation/issue.t
Sponsored-by: Koha-Suomi Oy
Signed-off-by: Sally <sally.healey@cheshiresharedservices.gov.uk>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
We are seeing the following lines several times in the codebase
$cache->clear_from_cache("default_value_for_mod_marc-");
But values are never set for this key.
Test plan:
Ask you, "Is the above correct?"
Use the correct 'git grep' and 'git log' and confirm the assertion.
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Error while executing command: no such element: Unable to locate element: //*[@id="circ_returns_checkin"]/div[2]/div[1]/div[2]/button at /usr/share/perl5/Selenium/Remote/Driver.pm line 411.
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Cannot wait more for element '//input[@type="submit"]' to be visible at /kohadevbox/koha/t/lib/Selenium.pm line 189.
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
The tests create a new branch to make sure one exists without rules. We then add a rule
and delete it. We can simply create the new branch and never assign a rule
Signed-off-by: Nick Clemens <nick@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
The code for get_processingreturn_policy was very similar to
get_lostreturn_policy. Combining the two methods allows for use of
get_effective_rules which uses get_effective_rule_value which is cached.
This should reduce lines of code and improve performance
Tests updated and adjusted as well
Signed-off-by: Nick Clemens <nick@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This enhancement gives the ability to set a policy for the lost item
processing fee that may get charged additional to the lost item
replacement cost. The processing fee can be:
- refunded
- refunded if unpaid
- kept
To test:
Set-up
1. Find an item, Item A. Go to Administration -> Item types and edit the
item type for Item A. Add a default replacement cost and a processing
fee and Save.
2. Go to Administration -> system preferences and set the following:
- WhenLostChargeReplacementFee: Charge
- BlockReturnOfLostItems: Don't block
3. Scroll down to the default lost item fee refund on return policy. Set
the refund lost item replacement fee policy to 'refund lost item charge'.
4. Edit Item A and set a replacement cost.
Reproduce
5. Check out Item A to Patron A.
6. Click the barcode to view Item A's information. Edit Item A and set
the Lost status to 'lost'.
7. Go back to Patron A's checkouts. The item should now be checked in
with two new charges applied - a lost item fee (the item's replacement
cost) and a lost item processing fee (set in item types).
8. Check in Item A to mark it as found.
9. Go back to Patron A's account. Notice the lost item fee has been
refunded, but the processing fee remains.
10. Manually pay or write off the processing fee. This enhancement
removes the need for this manual step.
11. Apply the patch and restart services
Test with lost item - refund
12. Go to Administration -> circulation and fines rules. Scroll down to
the default lost item fee refund on return policy. Notice there is now a
refund lost item processing fee policy. Set this to 'refund lost item
processing charge'.
13. Repeat steps 6 to 9.
14. Go back to Patron A's account. Both the lost item fee and processing
fee should have been refunded.
15. Repeat steps 6 to 8 (do not check it yet).
16. Go back to Patron A's account. Pay the processing fee.
17. Repeat step 9.
18. Go back to Patron A's account. Both the lost item fee and processing
fee should have been refunded (you'll now be in a credit because the
paid processing fee was also refunded).
Test with lost item - refund_unpaid
19. Go to Administration -> circulation and fines rules. Scroll down to
the default lost item fee refund on return policy. Notice there is now a
refund lost item processing fee policy. Set this to 'refund lost item
processing charge (only if unpaid)'.
20. Repeat steps 6 to 9.
21. Go back to Patron A's account. Both the lost item fee and processing
fee should have been refunded.
22. Repeat steps 16 to 19.
23. Go back to Patron A's account. The lost item fee should have been
refunded but not the processing fee, as this was already paid.
Test with lost item - leave
24. Go to Administration -> circulation and fines rules. Scroll down to
the default lost item fee refund on return policy. Notice there is now a
refund lost item processing fee policy. Set this to 'leave lost item
processing charge'.
25. Repeat steps 6 to 9.
26. Go back to Patron A's account. The lost item fee and processing fee
should have been refunded but not the processing fee.
Other tests
27. Confirm tests pass
- t/db_dependent/Koha/Item.t
- t/db_dependent/Koha/CirculationRules.t
Sponsored-by: Auckland University of Technology
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Clemens <nick@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Clemens <nick@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: Magnus Enger <magnus@libriotech.no>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
To test:
1. prove t/db_dependent/Illrequests.t
2. Observe test failure
1..3
ok 1 - before change, original borrowernumber found
not ok 2 - after change, changed borrowernumber found in holds
# Failed test 'after change, changed borrowernumber found in holds'
# at t/db_dependent/Illrequests.t line 167.
# got: '3786'
# expected: '3787'
ok 3 - after change, changed borrowernumber found in illrequests
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 3.
not ok 4 - store borrowernumber change also updates holds
Signed-off-by: Magnus Enger <magnus@libriotech.no>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
In those rare cases when authorities are updated by an external agency (or
even internally, by reviewing and correcting an exported authority file)
when the heading tag will be changed (seems odd but happens:
111 Congress ==> 110 Corporate body.Congress ;
100 Person ==> 110 Corporate body (a company named with person's name ;
151 City--object ==> 150 Object (city) etc.)
and then the authority record in Koha database will be updated with
bulkmarcimport or by calling directly ModAuthority from a custom script,
the merge function "doesn't know" that the change to the authority type
has been made and, consequently, doesn't adequately change the tag in
related fields in biblio records (as it would if two different records
with different authtypecode were merged with Koha interface).
This is because at the moment when merge function is being called
by ModAuthority:
Koha::Authority::Types->find($autfrom->authtypecode)
Koha::Authority::Types->find($authto->authtypecode)
both have the same value (because $mergefrom == $mergeto).
Therefore in case when $mergefrom == $mergeto and the heading tag changes,
$authtypefrom and $authfrom calculated in merge in the ordinar way are
misleading and should not be taken unto consideration.
Test plan:
==========
1. run t/db_dependent/Authority/Merge.t
2. you should see problems in "Test update A with modified heading tag
(changing authtype)"
3. apply the patch
4. run t/db_dependent/Authority/Merge.t again
5. the test should pass
Alternatively:
1. have an authority record used in biblio;
export it to file;
change 1XX heading tag to a different (but reasonable) value
and possibly change also the content of the heading
(one can delete also 942 but it doesn't matter);
make bulkmarcimport.pl -a -update -file <modified_auth_file> and
see that the tag in biblio record has not been changed (whereas
the type of authority record did change);
2. make orders in database (so that the authority type and the tag of
the field in biblio record correspond); apply the patch;
3. repeat the test from 1.
Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
We are now using the patron category selects on almost all system
preferences, but OpacHiddenItemsExceptions was still missing.
To test:
- Before applying the patch:
- Add patron categories to OpacHiddenItemsExceptions using |
- Add configuration to OpacHiddenItems
- Verify all works as expected in the OPAC
- Apply patch, run database update
- Verify the system preference shows the correct settings from before
- Verify feature still works as expected
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
SendPasswordRecoveryEmail relies on the calling script to tell if there is an
existing valid recovery already. If there's an expired recovery-entry the
members/notices.pl script will try to create a new entry resulting in a duplicate
key error.
This patch fixes the bug by removing the need for the calling script to do the check as
since SendPasswordRecoveryEmail does the same thing anyway.
SendPasswordRecoveryEmail will now use DBIx ->update_or_create instead of looking at
the $update param to determine if it should update an existing entry or create a new.
The update param is removed from all calling scripts and test are updated.
To test:
1. Generate a password recovery mail for a patron
2. Let it expire.
3. Generate a new password recovery from staff to the same patron - Fail!
4: Apply patch
5. Generate a new password recovery from staff to the same patron - Success!
6. Opac password recovery flow should also work.
7. Tests pass.
Sponsored-by: Lund University Library
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This patch adds support for searching additional_fields when retrieving
invoices using C4::Acquisition::Invoices.
To test:
1. Apply this patch
2. Run:
$ kshell
k$ prove t/db_dependent/Acquisition.t
=> SUCCESS: Tests pass!
3. Sign off :-D
Sponsored-by: The Research University in the Helmholtz Association (KIT)
Signed-off-by: Michaela Sieber <michaela.sieber@kit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer@bsz-bw.de>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
This patch adds a tst for copy without subfields. I also clarify what eachstep does
so the next user/coder understands current behaviour
Update existing or add new: In the case where the field/subfield exists
we update, if we have two fields - one with the subfield, and one without, we
add the subfield to the one without
Copy field:
- If given a subfield - we will add to existing fields in the record
- If not given a subfield - we create an entirely new field
The logic of all of this is tricky, makes sense in a certain light, any complaints
are for a new bug :-)
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: David Nind <david@davidnind.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
