Comment 4 for bug 1169569

Reviewed and it seems to make sense to me. However as I worked on testing this, I found that record summary of copies does not take the part order into consideration. Using the concerto dataset (record 84, for example), I found that the order of copies was based on call number, barcode, etc.

I think this is based on what we see in Open-ILS/src/perlmods/lib/OpenILS/Application/AppUtils.pm (see this commit for an example of a recent change for copy ordering -- http://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=Evergreen.git;a=commit;h=d21d1dac8f0212764de5a2c3e352ceebc2d63ef5 )

Setting this bug back to incomplete pending further review and work.