On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Owen Leonard wrote:
>> Set to Lowest priority: When the reserve was set to this it would
>> always stay at the bottom of the reserves list, even if a new reserve
>> was added. This one is a bit harder, but still very do-able.
>
> The situation that springs to mind
s.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: koha-devel-boun...@lists.koha.org
> [mailto:koha-devel-boun...@lists.koha.org] On Behalf Of Kyle Hall
> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 9:06 AM
> To: koha-devel
> Subject: [Koha-devel] Rewriting the Dev_Week Reserves Updates
>
t: Friday, September 18, 2009 9:06 AM
To: koha-devel
Subject: [Koha-devel] Rewriting the Dev_Week Reserves Updates
Hey all,
I'm rewriting my dev_week reserves patch for koha3 and I need some
input on whether certain features I had are truly useful. So here they
are:
Expiration Date: An opti
> I'm rewriting my dev_week reserves patch for koha3
Hooray! I've been coveting your dev_week holds enhancements for ages.
> Expiration Date: An optional date after which the reserve would be
> automatically canceled.
I second this one. Besides David's suggestion (which might require a
*global*
Hey all,
I'm rewriting my dev_week reserves patch for koha3 and I need some
input on whether certain features I had are truly useful. So here they
are:
Expiration Date: An optional date after which the reserve would be
automatically canceled. This one would be pretty easy.
Set to Lowest priority
