[Evergreen-general] [External] Discussion/Heat request for Bug 1721053

[Murphy, Benjamin]

This is something that we also run into regularly and is an annoyance for staff.

I think the ideal behavior for us would be:

If there's a limit on a circmod, a patron hits the max holds on that circmod and can't place more holds for that circmod, but they're not restricted in the number of holds they can place for other circmods until they hit any limits in place for those circmods.

So the ability to set:
org unit -> permission group -> circmod -> hold limit

But with an inheritance structure where these could also be set if values not provided for one of the fields, with more specificity winning (do we then get into weighting?):
org unit -> permission group  -> hold limit
org unit -> circmod  -> hold limit


This brings to mind some of what we've learned about circ limit sets, in that they are ORs rather than ANDs. So, as we understand it, Evergreen will consider either the circulation modifier or shelving location found in the limit set, not both. That's not the behavior I'm describing above.

Interested in this conversation!



Benjamin Murphy

NC Cardinal Program Manager

State Library of North Carolina

benjamin.murphy at dncr.nc.gov  | https://statelibrary.ncdcr.gov/services-libraries/nc-cardinal

109 East Jones Street  | 4640 Mail Service Center

Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4600

The State Library is part of the NC Department of Natural & Cultural Resources.

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Please note new email address



________________________________
From: Evergreen-general <evergreen-general-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org> on behalf of Elizabeth Davis via Evergreen-general <evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 9:23 AM
To: evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org <evergreen-general at list.evergreen-ils.org>
Cc: Elizabeth Davis <elizabeth.davis at sparkpa.org>
Subject: [External] [Evergreen-general] Discussion/Heat request for Bug 1721053

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.


Hello Everyone,



PaILS is interested in pursuing future development for bug 1721053<https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1721053> and we’d like to see how other consortia feel about it. Currently there is max hold option in the hold policies, but it doesn’t limit to just the hold policy scenario but rather all holds.  For example, if you have a hold policy that says that patrons can have a max hold of 2 on the kit circulation modifier it will block patrons from placing holds on kits if they have more than 2 holds on any other circulation modifiers.   We have a few libraries that want to limit the number of holds patrons can have on higher ticket items like hotspots and library of things items.  They might have a higher limit on other circulation modifiers like 10 dvds and 25 on books.



We are interested in seeing how folks would prefer this to function.  Would a hold limit set, similar to how the circulation limit sets,  as suggested in the comments work?  Would you prefer the max hold value work on the individual hold scenario and leave it in the policy as it is now?  Does anyone have an alternative idea?



Thanks,

[cid:image003.png at 01DADF3D.835ADC60]Elizabeth Davis (she/her), Support & Project Management Specialist

Pennsylvania Integrated Library System (PaILS) | SPARK

(717) 256-1627 | elizabeth.davis at sparkpa.org<mailto:katherine.dannehl at sparkpa.org>
support.sparkpa.org<https://support.sparkpa.org/> | support at sparkpa.org<mailto:support at sparkpa.org>



________________________________

Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-general/attachments/20240726/19d9a146/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5397 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-general/attachments/20240726/19d9a146/attachment-0001.png>