Current behaviour

Backend

When the DOI is optional then we implemented some checks regarding the allowed DOI transitions when you update a draft or publish.

In summary, the allowed transitions are:

ALLOWED_DOI_PROVIDERS_TRANSITIONS = {
        "datacite": {
            "allowed_providers": ["datacite"],
            "message": _(
                "A previous version used a DOI registered from {sitename}. This version must also use a DOI from {sitename}."
            ),
        },
        "external": {
            "allowed_providers": ["external", "not_needed"],
            "message": _(
                "A previous version was published with a DOI from an external provider or without one. You cannot use a DOI registered from {sitename} for this version."
            ),
        },
        "not_needed": {
            "allowed_providers": ["external", "not_needed"],
            "message": _(
                "A previous version was published with a DOI from an external provider or without one. You cannot use a DOI registered from {sitename} for this version."
            ),
        },
    }

• The message defined for each transition is displayed to the user, either on save or publish.

Frontend

The UI has the below checks:

• If you click on "No, I need one" then there is client side check to show the user a message that they need explicitly to click on "Get DOI now" button
• Editing a published record show all options regarding DOI disabled
• New version show all options available but the backend instructs what is allowed based on the ALLOWED_DOI_PROVIDERS_TRANSITIONS

Needed improvements

UI

• Edit: allow the available actions that the backend allows in the UI too. Currently, all options are disabled when you edit a published record
• Edit: To align if we want to allow the minting of a DOI if a record was published without DOI
• New version: Allow only the actions that are allowed. Currently, all options are available but the backend validates and restricts the actions you can do to publish.