[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Web Client - Lost and Paid Not Updating Correctly

[John Amundson]

Thanks, Dawn.

I have filed a bug report: https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1781274


<http://www.cwmars.org>

John Amundson | Library Applications Associate III | CW MARS

jamundson at cwmars.org | 508-755-3323 x322 <%28508%29%20755-3323>

http://www.cwmars.org

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Dawn Dale <ddale at georgialibraries.org>
wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> We have this happen occasionally as well. I am not sure if there is a bug
> report on it or not though.  If you open a bug report I will confirm it.
> What I do is I add $.01 to the bill and then pay $.01 to force the bill to
> close.  I do not know why the bill does not close originally as we cannot
> reproduce it on command either.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dawn Dale
> PINES Services Specialist, Circulation
> Georgia Public Library Service
> 1800 Century Place Suite 150
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1800+Century+Place+Suite+150+Atlanta,+GA+30345&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Atlanta, GA 30345
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1800+Century+Place+Suite+150+Atlanta,+GA+30345&entry=gmail&source=g>
> 404-235-7136
> ddale at georgialibraries.org
>
> * The GPLS office is in the midst of relocating so it may be difficult to
> reach us by phone at times. Please use the Help Desk when you need to
> contact us: https://help.georgialibraries.org
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:30 PM, John Amundson <jamundson at cwmars.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, All:
>>
>> Our consortium upgraded to the web client, 3.0.8, over Memorial Day
>> weekend.
>>
>> Since then we have had 3 reports, (all within the last few weeks), of a
>> problem that I cannot seem to pin down/replicate.
>>
>> I can open a Launchpad bug with these details, as well, but I first
>> wanted to try the list to see if anyone else has seen this or had any
>> insight before filing.
>>
>> First a little background since the issue is related to billing,
>> specifically the LOST status, and I know there is variation in how this
>> status is used. We use LOST to represent an item that was either a) marked
>> "lost (by patron)", or b) has been overdue for 28 days or more. In both
>> cases, when an item becomes lost, the item price is billed and a lost item
>> block is placed on the patron record.
>>
>> Normally when a lost item is paid, the following happens:
>>
>>    - The balance owed on the bill is reduced to 0, and the bill is moved
>>    to the History tab.
>>    - The bill is updated with a transaction finish time of the last
>>    payment.
>>    - The item moves to status Lost & Paid.
>>    - The item no longer appears attached to the patron's account.
>>    - The lost item block is lifted from the account.
>>
>> However, on rare occasions in the web client, we are seeing something
>> different. In these instances, when a lost item is paid, the following
>> happens:
>>
>>    - The balance owed on the bill is reduced to 0, and the bill is moved
>>    to the History tab as expected.
>>    - The bill is NOT updated with a transaction finish time, (the field
>>    is blank).
>>    - The item continues to stay in status Lost.
>>    - The item continues to appear in the patron's Items Out list.
>>    - The lost item block stays on the patron's account.
>>
>> I have tried and tried again to duplicate this, but I have not been
>> (un)successful, though I know there is truth to these reports because I
>> have seen the aftermath, (i.e. item bill fully paid but still on
>> account/blocked).
>>
>> The items do not seem share common histories, (i.e. one was marked lost
>> manually, the others organically, one of the transactions was renewed 2
>> times, the others no renewals, one of the items was deleted, the others not
>> deleted). The only commonality I've found is that in each report, the
>> bill was part of a larger group of bills paid. In the most recent report,
>> 5+ billed items were paid for with the same payment; all but one updated
>> correctly.
>>
>> However, I have tested this on my side with a variety of cases, (all
>> lost, mixed billing types, etc), and every single time the payment/bill is
>> processed correctly, so at that point, batch bill pay enters into the
>> causation vs correlation debate in relation to this issue.
>>
>> So, anyone else seeing something similar? Should I just go straight to
>> filing a bug report?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> John Amundson
>> <http://www.cwmars.org>
>>
>> John Amundson | Library Applications Associate III | CW MARS
>>
>> jamundson at cwmars.org | 508-755-3323 x322 <%28508%29%20755-3323>
>>
>> http://www.cwmars.org
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20180711/ccada7e4/attachment.html>