[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Metarecords and copy numbers

[Mike Rylander]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Kevin Kierans <kevink at tnrdlib.bc.ca> wrote:
> Meta-records
>
> Before we migrated to Evergreen we painfully separated our paperbacks and
> hardcovers into separate bib records.  Until then we'd attached paperbacks
> and hardcovers to the same bib record because, all things considered (the
> hold queue and patron satisfaction),  this made sense.  But (we thought)
> with meta-records and advanced holds, we could allow patrons to choose what
> they wanted to include when they place their holds.
>
> Except, in our consortium, meta-holds included things (formats and copies)
> from other libraries outside our org unit, things the patron was never going
> to get, because we don't lend between org units.  Unhappy confused patrons.
> So we turned it off.
>
> But it's still a good idea.  Holds are a big part of our business here.  And
> if meta-records can be tuned so you can include or not certain formats, and
> if holds can "respect" org boundaries, then we 'd like to see it back.
>

This commit ( http://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=Evergreen.git;a=commitdiff;h=ff7ea322f7d9010643760f01f201a6329209763c
) seems to take care of what you want, at least in terms of respecting
the selection_depth on the hold (which is set by the Hard Boundary OU
setting).  That may not be backportable on its own, but probably needs
(at least) e16c8b771ecc2b57cadbc27f6677eb7fe44578e1 as well.


-- 
Mike Rylander
 | Director of Research and Development
 | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
 | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
 | email:  miker at esilibrary.com
 | web:  http://www.esilibrary.com