The new short_loan_courtesy_reminder & short_loan_overdue_reminder cannot be configured for multiple locations. For institutions with several hourly loan locations (for example Boston College maintains 2 and 3 hour loan periods for Course Reserves and a 4 hour loan period for some technology items) this dictates that the reminder notice has to be set based on the location with the shortest loan period. The overdue notice must be timed to make sense for for the longest loan period.

In our test configuration we used the following time parameters:

​short_loan_courtesy_reminder - 105 minutes
short_loan_overdue_reminder - 241 minutes

However, this creates a situation whereby patrons borrowing from some locations will have already incurred an overdue charge before the overdue notice is sent.

In order for this functionality to provide the service is designed for, it must be robust enough to support different loan periods.

https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/030Fulfillment/080Configuring_Fulfillment/110General#Configuring_Fulfillment_Jobs

When using Lender Due date for RS items (Fulfillment > General > Other Settings > ignore_lender_due_date = false) the date for Pick up from shelf is the same as the Due date. This is, according to ExLibris, working as intended, but we have a few issues with the workflow.

This makes the workflow more manual and difficult than needed, given that we have to manually check RS items that is not getting picked up by patron within a couple of weeks. Having the RS items on Hold shelf for up to 4-6 weeks is poor use of time - for the patrons, the book and the library.

If we could set a Hold shelf expiry date for RS items that is shorter than Due date, it would make it easier for the circulation desk personal to remind patrons that they have a book waiting. This will give the book more time at use with the patron, and less on the hold shelf. It will shorten the waiting time for other patrons, as the book will be returned earlier to the owning library if it is no longer needed by the patron.

The best would be if this process could be automated, e.g. by TOU policy. (Much like the Hold Shelf Period policy that exist for TOU type Requests.)
If it’s not possible to populate a Hold expiry date automatically, a data field in the receiving RS items pop-ups would be helpful. (Pictures added.)

University of South Australia Library would be interested in accessing various error reports for the jobs that we run at the time when we run the jobs.
We are aware we can check Import errors as per "Resolving Import Issues" but for other type of jobs we cannot check error reports.
As an example, running a filtering job on a set provides us with a report including a brief information on the number of records that "failed" as in this message:
"Of the 67201 records processed, 4 records failed. For more information view the report details (or contact Support using the process ID)." I attached a file with full details of this report.
We would very much appreciate having access the all error reports for the jobs that we run at the time when we run them, without having to create an incident case asking Support for error reports each time when we have problem records.
We believe that allowing us to check the problem records before creating an incident report would save time for everyone, as we could fix certain problems without creating incidents.
Thank you for your consideration,
Daniela Nastasie

There is a crucial step missing in the Automatic Generation of the Summary Holdings Statement Based on Items process. The process is documented here:
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/040Resource_Management/040Metadata_Management/020Navigating_the_MD_Editor_Page?uxp=true#Automatic_Generation_of_the_Summary_Holdings_Statement_Based_on_Items

When items which are linked to the Holdings record are withdrawn, there is no process to update the Holdings record 863/864/865 fields to create an updated 866/867/868 field. When items are withdrawn, the user has to manually edit the Holdings records.

Since the creation of the 863/864/865 field is now automated based on received items being linked to the holdings record, there is a need for the 863/864/865 to be automatically re-created when the linked items are withdrawn.

We would like to be able to copy multiple lines from MARC records and paste them into the metadata editor so that multiple MARC fields are pasted into the record in one action. This would help us enormously with our workflow of importing MARC authority records from LibrariesAustralia into Alma.

For us, this is necessary because the LibrariesAustralia headings are not in the community zone and are unlikely to ever be included there and Alma does not allow for Z39.50 import of authority headings.

We have this functionality of copying and pasting multiple fields in the LibrariesAustralia Cataloguing Client and other library systems allow it. At the moment we need to paste each line one by one into Alma and it is slow and repetitive. This process is a step backward from previous functionality.

We'd want to be able to control the anonymisation of requests, resource sharing requests and fines and fees in a similar way to loans. In particular we'd like to be able to set a parameter for days since user expiry and since the request or fine was complete.

This would allow us to create a clear policy for anonymising and purging data in Alma so that all data was treated in the same way i.e. could say that all data was anonymised or purged X number of years after user left. It would also allow us to be confident that we are only anonymising data that we no longer need.

In our institution, we have thousands of active electronic records for our institution but belong to the Community Zone. We want to copy massively these records to our catalog without having to do it one at a time.
Our usual procedure is, from an excel file in which we have the ISBNs or ISSNs of the electronic documents, to upload the portfolios from the electronic collection itself. In this way we bring and activate in our institution the portfolios of the collection, but this does not generate a local copy in our catalog of each of them. So, we have many thousands of portfolios brought to our institution in this way, but now we want to know how we can copy them to our catalog without having to do it one at a time.
We need to add many records from our IZ but linked to the Community Zone a marc field 526. In this note field we provide information on the recommended bibliography for our degrees. We need to load that field 526 via API.
The addition of this field 526 allows us afterwards that users can search in Primo for the bibliography recommended for their studies.
Currently, Alma does not allow the incorporation of this 526 field by API if that record is not copied in our catalog, so we need that record to be copied in our catalog. Adding this field to a record that is not copied in the catalog is possible if it is done one by one, but we want to do it via the API since it is several thousand records. However, the API gives an error if you try to put that field in a record linked to the CZ, without a copy to our local catalog.
Conclusion: We want to copy massively records from CZ to catalog without having to do it one at a time

Hello,
It would be nice if there was a job of conversion of every part of a record (bib, hol, item, portfolio) into another part, for example:
Bib records into Items
Bib records into Holdings
Bib records into Portfolios
Bib records into Orders
Items into Bib records
Items into Holdings
Orders into Bib records
Orders into items
Orders into Portfolios
Portfolios into Bib records
Portfolios into Orders
This way, we will not be limited by the search for any job.
For example, we would be able to search Bib records, convert the set into items and run a job for item changes (similar to manage-70 for those who used Aleph).

Thanks.