Verified sharing holdings sources setting on https://folio-dev-thunderjet-consortium.ci.folio.org/ via API, looks good.

So BE is ready and ops can invoke sharing settings endpoint for /holdings-sources now, going to close this BE ticket.

If we need UI support to be able to see Inventory -> Holdings Sources in Consortium Manager - please create a new UI story, but basically orignial intent to share this setting via API has been resolved in scope this story.

CC:  

Tested
Two images:

First one sharing setting request
Second one Result of request (if there is no any error, status will be completed)

POST:

PUT request:

DELETE:

I was hoping to have just API, but if as Ann-Marie that is it updateable in the UI maybe have the UI as well. I don't think this has to be done for Poppy since there is a workaround. I wanted to record this gap in Jira. I am expecting the sharing settings endpoint to manipulate holdings sources.

Thanks!

Hi and The holdings sources can be updated via UI. See https://folio-snapshot.dev.folio.org/settings/inventory/holdingsSources. There was no dev team on this bug, so adding Thunderjet. Also copying and since this affects Inventory. Thank you!

Hi , do you mean we should have the ability to add/update Holding Sources and Contributor Name Types()  by UI Consortium Manager or just have the possibility to use API?

Regarding UI Consortium Manager - here is list of supported settings for now: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/FOLIJET/Consortium+manager+settings 

If we are talking regarding API usage there are 2 options here:

• Use a direct call to Publish Coordinator Link. In this case you should have an admin user that has affiliations in all tenants and appropriate permissions to endpoints that you are going to use in publish request

• Use sharing setting endpoint Link . In this case mod-consortia will use system user and will create setting in all available consortium tenants. System user 'consortia-system-user' from central tenant should be updated with new permissions in this case(and also all shadow system users of this user from central tenant)

I think the first option would be easier if we need quick solution without additional releases and manipulation with permissions of system user manually.

CC: