Angularize Acq Load MARC Order Records

[Tiffany Little]

Opening this bug to track the Angularization of the acquisitions Load MARC Order Records interface.

This may bump up against the work being done on bug 1929741 so it may need some rebasing as that progresses.

I'll post a WIP branch soon.

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

Here's a branch for review:

https://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=working/Evergreen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/user/tlittle/lp1929741_acqpicklistuploader

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

Commit added to the same branch so that the form picks up relevant library settings.

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

For anyone testing this, I'll note that this adds form templates (like cataloging vandelay). So your checkboxes, etc. are no longer just "sticky" and saved in your browser. You actually set up your preferred upload settings and then save them as a template which is saved to the server.

So you would set up your defaults in the form as you like, then save them as a new template and set as default (if you choose).

[Ruth Frasur Davis (redavis)]

Record Match set is a required field with no match sets set up. Setting up a match set through Vandelay does make them available, but this is not something we use/require locally. Can this be an option rather than requirement?

My uploads are hanging up and I'm not sure if this is where.

[Christine Morgan (cmorgan-z)]

I like the look of the interface. It is very clear and readable. A few things in initial testing.

1. The fiscal year is not retained in the input box. I type it in and as soon as I click elsewhere, the year disappears from the box.

2. Should all fields, with the exception of the upload queue perhaps, be able to be saved in a template?

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

Christine, I think fiscal year wasn't being retained because there weren't any fiscal years in the database on my test server. I've added a couple now; would you test again?

For the template, currently all fields on the form can be saved in a template with the exceptions of: provider, selection list, and queue. I agree that queue should be excluded. Should provider and selection list be saveable?

To Ruth's point re: match set being a required field. Currently provider, record source, match set, merge profile and queue are required fields. I made those required due to these bugs:

Bug 1676600 - queue
Bug 1408048 - provider
Bug 1473143 - match set

For Ruth and others, should any of the currently required fields *not* be required?*

*With my Acq hat on, I say that provider should be required because it just straight up fails if you don't have one. I also think queue should be required, but am not sure if that's our workflow or not that makes it such a pain if it's not entered.

[Jennifer Pringle (jpringle-u)]

+1 to provider being included in the template. If you have a few main vendors it makes sense to be able to set up a template for each

I don't think selection list should be saved in the templates because presumably it'll be a different selection list each time. (Our libraries don't use selection lists so I'll defer to someone who does if they think it should be included in the templates.)

[Ruth Frasur Davis (redavis)]

I'm still of a mind that match sets not be required even with the outstanding bug. Requiring the match set doesn't actually fix #1473143 (which should be done), but would require us to add to workflows.

I agree about the provider. Anything that causes the whole thing to fail by its absence, should be required.

[Christine Morgan (cmorgan-z)]

Thanks Tiffany! Fiscal year works now except that it does not appear to be sticky like it is now. With templates, perhaps we don't need it to be sticky. It could just be set in the template. Thoughts?

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

Removing the pullrequest for now to work on some of the issues found in testing.

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

I've added fixes for the comments above, and rebased the branch. Adding pullrequest tag again for more testing.

[Mary Llewellyn (mllewell)]

I'm having trouble with the fiscal year box. I've no objection to not having fiscal years set up as long at the field isn't required. Our libraries don't include fund information with their acq item loads, so we haven't been using that field.

But with no FY defined and the field being required, I'm unable to proceed with loading my vendor file.

[Tiffany Little (tslittle)]

Hi Mary, Fiscal Year was changed to be required based on requests at the August Acq Interest Group meeting. I've gone ahead and changed it back to non-required since that's the current behavior, and anyone who really would like it required can post a wishlist bug after this is merged. I also added two fiscal years in the database for testing (I always forget to create new ones when I refresh the server, since there's no seed data for them).

Other note for testers: I also removed the Ordering Agency from beginning with any value, and setting it as required before the Upload button will be active. I can't fix the styling with having a red bar on the field, that's bug 1933498, but you can't upload anything until you make a choice. My thought with having it blank would be that users would have to affirmatively choose something (and save it to a template, if they want) instead of it being prepopulated with their workstation lib or CONS, both of which might be wrong.

[Galen Charlton (gmc)]

Noting that I've cherry-picked this into my working branch for bug 1942220, user/gmcharlt/ang-acq-4-wip, which also includes one of Bill's WIP branches for bug 1929741.

The merge conflicts against Bill's stuff were straightforward to deal with, and so far the Angular load MARC orders appears to be working fine with the rest of the nascent Angular PO and LI interfaces.

[Mary Llewellyn (mllewell)]

Testing for the EDCI, but we're back to the fiscal year field being required again, with no FY values available. I can't upload any files at this point.

[Terran McCanna (tmccanna)]

Marking this as a dupe of bug 1942220 since the work is being done there.