Improve add to library dialog

[shinyichen]

• Change from input field to show first page of libraries
• Only fetch 1 page at a time.
• Allow multiple library selections

Screen.Recording.2026-02-04.at.4.30.28.PM.mov

[shinyichen]

@kelockhart Please see the video demo to see if that's a good way of selecting libraries.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.6%. Comparing base (908d3ec) to head (5fc95fa).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #791     +/-   ##
========================================
- Coverage    61.6%   61.6%   -0.0%     
========================================
  Files         312     312             
  Lines       35995   35995             
  Branches     1593    1593             
========================================
- Hits        22141   22139      -2     
- Misses      13817   13819      +2     
  Partials       37      37             

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[kelockhart]

Looking good! I would probably add checkboxes next to the libraries, though, as that's how we indicate selection everywhere else - see the author modal, for example. Otherwise the pagination and overall functionality looks right.

[shinyichen]

Updated with checkbox

[thostetler]

Should we also provide a search bar so we can filter the library list?

[kelockhart]

@thostetler We've taken out the ability to search the libraries, because it was a hacky method, not a built-in biblib method, and it made it so people with lots of libraries would have found this unusable. The pagination makes it usable for people with lots of libraries, plus people can sort by library name instead.

[thostetler]

@kelockhart I remember this now. Makes sense!

Would be a good biblib feature then.

[kelockhart]

@shinyichen looks good to me!

[thostetler]

Looks pretty good, I have a small issue with the implementation -- but the idea is good and works well!

[thostetler]

one issue I see here is that we're calling this one each of the IDs. I would expect the toast to keep triggering but it doesn't -- so that is good.

But I wonder what happens if one of the requests fails for some reason, would we get a toast about it? it looks like it would get swallowed by the other ones, if the final one succeeded.

It's a little nuanced, but I was able to replicate by blocking one of the library requests

library_issue-2026-02-09_14.18.41.mp4

I think instead of doing it this way with a loop we should use Promise.all and wait for all to be done and then report on number failed (and maybe state a reason) and number succeeded

wdyt?

[shinyichen]

Ya, let me fix it.

[shinyichen]

@thostetler Please check my latest commit