Comment 2 for bug 1078787

Hi Dan,

In looking at the example at http://egtraining.noblenet.org/eg/opac/record/1797638?query=new%20yorker;qtype=keyword;locg=2;expand=issues#issues, I ran the following SQL query to see if this owning library were set correctly.

SELECT id,record,owning_lib FROM serial.record_entry WHERE record = '1797638'

The results are:

"id","record","owning_lib"
"117","1797638","4"
"876","1797638","15"
"949","1797638","18"
"1038","1797638","18"
"1134","1797638","22"
"1347","1797638","26"
"218","1797638","5"
"8545","1797638","44"
"8910","1797638","37"

However, in digging further, I think I've found the problem isn't with the MFHD records that people manually add. The problem is with the holdings statements automatically generated from the serials module.

For example, when I'm scoped to Beverly Public Library (http://evergreen.noblenet.org/eg/opac/record/1797638?query=new%20yorker;qtype=keyword;locg=2;expand=issues#issues), I see:

The manually-entered MFHDs for Beverly's two branches
The automatically-generated holdings summaries for Lynnfield and Marblehead.

When I'm scoped to the NOBLE branch, I see the automatically generated summaries from the Lynnfield and Marblehead libraries again while also seeing the manually-entered holdings statement for the NOBLE branch.

When scoped to Marblehead or Lynnfield, I see their textual holdings statement alongside the generated holdings summary http://egtraining.noblenet.org/eg/opac/record/1797638?query=new%20yorker;qtype=keyword;locg=26;expand=issues#issues.

I guess the bug should really be that the automatically-generated summaries should follow the same rules as the manually-entered holdings statements.