[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Another serials question

[Dan Wells]

Hello Mary,

Sorry for the delayed reply.  What you are saying is correct in 2.0.  The original thinking was that we wanted a unit for every item, as one eventual goal is to be able to generate shelving location based holdings summaries.  Without units, the serial items have no shelving location.  In 2.0, if one doesn't want to see received items in the OPAC, one might use a non-opac-visible location, status, or flag in their receive template to accomplish that, but that is more or less a workaround.

There is clearly demand for unit-less receiving, and the support already present in the Batch Receive interface has been extended to the Serial Control receiving interface as of 2.1.  To do so, select "No Unit" from the "Set Current Unit" selector when receiving.

Dan

-- 
*********************************************************************************
Daniel Wells, Library Programmer Analyst dbw2 at calvin.edu
Hekman Library at Calvin College
616.526.7133


>>> On 11/11/2011 at 12:17 PM, "Mary Llewellyn" <mllewell at biblio.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> When you want to receive an issue without creating a "unit"/item, it appears
> to me that you have to use Serials Batch Receive, and cannot do it in the
> Serials Control View. Is this correct? If I try to receive an issue there,
> and it has no assigned Receive Unit Template, I get an error message:
> 
> FIXME:  If you encounter this alert, please inform your IT/ILS helpdesk
> staff or your friendly Evergreen developers.
> 
> Fri Nov 11 2011 12:13:02 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
> 
> cmd_receive_items failed!
> 
> SERIAL_DISTRIBUTION_HAS_NO_COPY_TEMPLATE
> Units cannot be created for the given item because its associated
> distribution does not have a copy template.
> 
> And if I did assign a receive unit template, but don't want items created, I
> don't see an option like that as I do in Serials Batch Receive. I'm kind of
> forced to create an item, even if I don't supply a barcode or call number. 
> 
> Bug or feature?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mary
> 
> 
> Mary Llewellyn
> Database Manager
> Bibliomation, Inc.
> Middlebury, CT
> mllewell at biblio.org