Closed shariboodts closed 1 month ago
I tested this in the development environment, and it is exactly as the PI has noticed:
Starting situation for 5543
Manuscript | Sermon | Sermon.manu | MsItm | MsItem.manu | Codico | Codico.manu |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5543 | 77864 | NULL | 43497 | 5543 | 4441 | 5543 |
5543 | 77865 | NULL | 43498 | 5543 | 4441 | 5543 |
Situation for 5543
, after moving 77864 away
Manuscript | Sermon | Sermon.manu | MsItm | MsItem.manu | Codico | Codico.manu |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5543 | 77864 | NULL | 43497 | 5543 | 4440 | 5542 |
5543 | 77865 | NULL | 43498 | 5543 | 4441 | 5543 |
SermonMove
msitem.move_codico(lastcodico)
MsItem
, method move_codico()
manu
fieldResult: now it all works as it should. Problem solved!
When testing the 'moving manifestation' (to merge two manuscripts), I think the following problem arises. Although the transfer of manifestations from ms 1 to ms 2 initially worked fine, the manifestations disappeared when the empty ms 1 was deleted (as in, I think this is what happened). The purpose of the tool is to facilitate easy merging, so this is not what should happen. When moving manifestations, they should become linked to their new location and loose all ties to their old 'manuscript'.