[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Searching for items from multiple branches on an invoice

[Bill Erickson]

Hi Mary,

It's not immediately obvious to me why any of those would affect it.  The
limit-to-invoiceable filter just does a few things:

1. filters out lineitems that are canceled.
2. filters out lineitems that are already linked to the current invoice
3. filters out lineitems which have no invoiceable copies.  An invoiceable
copy is one that has not been canceled or invoiced (i.e. it cannot link to
a dis-encumbered fund debit).
4. if the provider is set on the invoice, it also filters out lineitems
that are not linked to the provider.

If your copies are invoiceable by these metrics, I'd say a LP entry is
warranted.  Somewhere in the SQL lies the answer.

-b




On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Mary Llewellyn <mllewell at biblio.org> wrote:

> Hi Bill, ****
>
> ** **
>
> If you can’t reproduce it, it may be that I’ve missed some setting for
> branches. ****
>
> ** **
>
> I have the fund and provider set to –SYS level.****
>
> The PO was set up with one of the branches as the ordering agency. Does
> that make a difference?****
>
> I’ve tried setting the invoice up with the branch as the ordering agency,
> and with the SYS level as the agency. Neither allowed the invoice to see
> the other branch’s items as “invoiceable.”****
>
> ** **
>
> I don’t have access to the SQL logs, but I’ll ask Ben if he can get that
> information for me.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks for replying.****
>
> ** **
>
> Mary****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:
> open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf Of *Bill
> Erickson
> *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 9:30 AM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
> *Cc:* Evergreen Community Catalogers
> *Subject:* Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Searching for items from multiple
> branches on an invoice****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi Mary,****
>
> ** **
>
> I have not heard of this problem before.  I tried a quick test on my dev
> server (running master) and was unable to reproduce it.  I'm probably
> missing some important nuance of the test data/setup, though.  I would
> suggest opening a Launchpad ticket.  If possible, it would be good to see
> the SQL logs showing the limit-by-invoiceable query that is failing to find
> the correct records.****
>
> ** **
>
> -b****
>
>      ****
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Mary Llewellyn <mllewell at biblio.org>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi all, especially you acq libraries…****
>
>  ****
>
> I’m getting ready to train in the acquisitions module at one of our member
> libraries that has 2 branches in its system, and I’ve run into something
> unexpected. I’d like to get an understanding of what’s happening, if not an
> outright fix, before I train their staff. ****
>
>  ****
>
> Scenario: I log in as Branch 1. ****
>
>  ****
>
> I’m able to create a PO with items from Branch 1 and Branch 2 and activate
> the order. When I go to Acquisitions/Create Invoice and set up the invoice
> and I try using the search tab on the invoice to get a list of items to add
> to the invoice, (searching by provider), if I have the box checked to
> filter by invoiceable items, I don’t get results when the lineitem includes
> copies from both branches. If I uncheck that box, then the lines with both
> branches will appear and I can add them to the invoice.****
>
>  ****
>
> I know I can create an invoice from a PO, but the object here is to be
> able to invoice without necessarily knowing the PO, for items that may be
> coming from several POs.****
>
>  ****
>
> Clearly, the system is seeing the lines from Branch 2 as “uninvoiceable,”
> but I don’t know why. ****
>
>  ****
>
> I’ve tried setting up the invoice receiver as system level or as Branch 1.
> I get the same results either way.****
>
> The provider is owned by the system.****
>
> The fund account is owned by the system.****
>
> Our invoice permissions, indeed, most of our acq permissions are set to
> system level.****
>
>  ****
>
> Either I’ve missed a setting somewhere, or there’s a glitch in the
> software.****
>
>  ****
>
> We are using Evergreen 2.4-ish, but it’s also happening in our test
> database with 2.5.****
>
>  ****
>
> Has anyone else encountered this?****
>
>  ****
>
> Thanks,****
>
>  ****
>
> Mary****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> Mary Llewellyn****
>
> Database Manager****
>
> Bibliomation, Inc.****
>
> 24 Wooster Ave.****
>
> Waterbury, CT 06708****
>
> mllewell at biblio.org****
>
>  ****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> -- ****
>
> Bill Erickson****
>
> | Senior Software Developer****
>
> | phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)****
>
> | email: berick at esilibrary.com****
>
> | web: http://esilibrary.com****
>
> | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source****
>
> ** **
>



-- 
Bill Erickson
| Senior Software Developer
| phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
| email: berick at esilibrary.com
| web: http://esilibrary.com
| Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20130722/5820ab48/attachment.htm>