Alexandra De Pretto
My feedback
31 results found
-
279 votes
Dear colleagues,
Thank you for raising this idea.
This was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.
During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:
Option 1: New dedicated process type
- It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
- Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
- The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules
Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"
- It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
- All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
- The difference from option 1 is that when an item…
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
47 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
200 votes
AdminAdina Marciano
(Admin, Ex Libris)
responded
Thank you for the suggested idea. We see its value and will consider it in the future. This development requires integration with third-party providers, and we will need to investigate the possibility of this development.
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
63 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
124 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
shared this idea
·
-
56 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
84 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
38 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
100 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
18 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·
-
268 votes
Alexandra De Pretto
supported this idea
·