Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dates show as available when "number of minimum days" cannot be matched #210

Open
2 tasks
ValeDeOro opened this issue Feb 12, 2019 · 2 comments
Open
2 tasks
Labels
type: bug The issue is a confirmed bug.

Comments

@ValeDeOro
Copy link

When setting minimum amount of nights (e.g. 4), the nights right before a fully booked night still show as available (even though this means the customer cannot choose the minimum of 4).

Affected ticket(s)

1793106-zen

What I expected

If the 2nd of March is booked, and I expect a minimum of 4 nights, the 1st of March should NOT show as available.

What happened instead

Only the fully booked day is blocked out. The previous day is shown as available, even though when selecting it, I get the expected warning.

Steps to reproduce the issue

I have created an accommodation product that requires booking of minimum 4, maximum 7 nights:


Link to screenshot: http://cld.wthms.co/wLrmA8

I restricted the quantity to 2.

I've then made two bookings on that product:
Feb 27th to March 3rd
March 1-8th

Because of the overlap, and the restriction to 2, this is how the calendar looks like:


Link to screenshot: http://cld.wthms.co/acHlyv

The 2nd is fully booked, which means that the 3 previous dates technically should not show as bookeable.
The 3rd should be available for check-in only.

When clicking on the 27th, I get the error message "minimum duration is 4", but of course I cannot select 4 nights, because the 2nd is not available.
I agree that the error message is misleading here (as it refers to March 1st:


Link to screenshot: http://cld.wthms.co/RtJmek

If I choose to check in on the 3rd, that is entirely possible (because the first bookings checkout is on March 3rd, so I should be able to check in.


Link to screenshot: http://cld.wthms.co/ggdVZM


  • Issue assigned to next milestone.
  • Issue assigned a priority (will be assessed by maintainers).
@amandasjackson
Copy link

The user in 1793106-zen reached out to clarify their issue further:

If you have 1 accomodation product that has 1 availability. No min or max nights - that's not part of the equation.
Check out time is 11am and check in time is 2pm
Someone books to check-in on the 4th and check-out on the 6th.
So:
4th partially booked (check-out still available)
5th fully booked,
6th partially booked (check-in still available)
You cannot click on the 5th. It's not that there is an error message.. you just cannot click on it. It does not become selected. It's not clickable.
When you are performing the first click. i.e. the check-in click - you should also not be able to click on the 4th for exactly the same reason.

I set up this exact product on my site and this is what you see when you try to click on the 4th for the initial "checkin" click. The user is saying that this should not be "clickable" on the initial checkin, and should rather be "blocked" similar to how it is for the 5th.

Image Link: http://cld.wthms.co/9XV8Tk

@dphyled
Copy link

dphyled commented Feb 13, 2019

Further clarification from the user in 1793106-zen

Along with the points above:

Using the same example though, please also note that if you have min nights stay setup on your product - you don't actually get the error message saying you can't book it, when you select the 4th... You just get the regular message that says there is a minimum nights stay...
So the message that says, this block cannot be booked, or whatever the wording is, should take priority over the other notification about min nights stay.

Confirmed on my site, when clicking the first date (which has no available slots), the message that is displayed is about the minimum duration, rather than "There are a maximum of 0 places remaining on DATE".

@vikrampm1 vikrampm1 added the type: bug The issue is a confirmed bug. label Mar 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: bug The issue is a confirmed bug.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants