Wishlist: Suppress holds and transits independently
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Evergreen |
Confirmed
|
Wishlist
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
We didn't make much use of the Checkin Modifier "Suppress Holds and Transits" until the widespread closures during the COVID-19 outbreak. Now that many of our libraries are closed to the public but still have staff in the building doing certain types of work, we find it would be much more flexible if Suppress Holds and Suppress Transits could be used separately.
Use Case: A library is accepting books returned through the book drop, and the courier is still running between branches, but they are closed to the public. They would like to be able to check in all the returned books and send out the ones that need to go back to other branches, but not fill holds. In this case, they'd like to be able to suppress holds, but not suppress transits.
tags: |
added: circ-checkin circ-holds circulation removed: checkin holds |
I would agree that these two checkin modifiers should be separated. Our consortium would also find individual modifiers much more useful.
I would also argue that when suppressing transits, items should get a status other than "Reshelving"
If an item belonging to another library in the consortium is checked in using Suppress Holds and Transits, it gets status "Reshelving". So the item looks like it's available at home, but instead it's almost untraceable, at another library. Staff and patrons can be searching for the item, and it can appear on the library's pull list.
I'm not sure if a different status, like "Canceled transit" is appropriate for this situation, or something more involved, but if the separation of the checkin modifiers is being addressed, the item's status should be also.