Overriding failed renewal for aged to lost item, non-renewable loan policy does not change aged to lost status

Description

Overview:
Steps to Reproduce:

  1. Log into some snapshot as diku_admin

  2. Check out an item to a user that will trigger a non-circulating loan policy

    • To create a non-circulating loan policy, create a new policy with the "Loanable" box unchecked

    • To create a check out that will trigger that policy, create a circulation rule that will trigger the policy and match all the elements in the circ rule. Usually, I make a circulation rule for a material type of "dvd" and edit the material type of the item I'm using to be "dvd"

  3. Wait for item to age to lost

  4. Renew the item. When renewal fails, override the failed renewal. Select a due date in the future when prompted.

Expected Results: After overriding the failed renewal, the due date changes to the date selected and the item status is Checked Out.
Actual Results: Due date changes, but item status is still aged to lost.
Additional Information:
Comments from and on , where this bug was first reported:

The override renewal checks a list of cases for which it is allowed to override renew, the list is following:

Loan policy is not loanable;
Loan policy is not renewable;
Unable to calculate new due date for the loan;
Loan has reached renewal limit;
There is a recall request for the item;
Item is aged to lost or declared lost.

We need to move 'Item is aged to lost or declared lost' above 'Loan policy is not renewable' to fix the bug I found when testing this issue.

URL:
Interested parties:

CSP Request Details

None

CSP Rejection Details

None

Potential Workaround

None

Attachments

2

relates to

Checklist

hide

TestRail: Results

Activity

Show:

Emma BoettcherOctober 9, 2020 at 1:49 PM

Tested on folio-snapshot as diku_admin

Emma BoettcherOctober 9, 2020 at 1:48 PM

Outcome #2 is expected, as with the following:

I'll report it separately and close this one.

Bohdan SuprunOctober 9, 2020 at 8:32 AM
Edited

Hi ,

I think it is something that is related to mixing the cases. What reason is expected in this case, is it:

  1. Item not renewed: Item is declared lost/aged to lost (i.e. the lost reason takes priority over other reasons)

  2. OR Item not renewed: item is declared lost, item is not loanable. (i.e. list all the matched reasons separated by comma)?

I think it should be a separate issue and might require some UI work.

It should be reproduceable for other similar mixes, e.g. item has recall request + it is not loanable/renewable, loan is not renewable/loanable + item is claimed returned, etc.

Emma BoettcherOctober 8, 2020 at 5:44 PM

I tested this and the status is changing, but it also is not reporting that the item is aged to lost in the renewal status column (just says that item wasn't loanable). Is that because of the bug fix, or is that a separate issue?

Bohdan SuprunOctober 7, 2020 at 11:12 AM

Hi ,

The fix has been deployed to the team environment.

Done

Details

Assignee

Reporter

Priority

Story Points

Sprint

Development Team

Prokopovych

Fix versions

Release

Q3 2020

TestRail: Cases

Open TestRail: Cases

TestRail: Runs

Open TestRail: Runs

Created October 2, 2020 at 5:46 PM
Updated October 9, 2020 at 1:49 PM
Resolved October 9, 2020 at 1:49 PM
TestRail: Cases
TestRail: Runs