On Wednesday, December 15, 2004, at 11:06 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
[...snip...]
I do NOT believe that backing out changes to the tax tables would EVER
be correct. Why should unposting an invoice change the existing tax
tables? That would be wrong, IMHO.
The question is really one of how to balance
Rich Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks, I think I'm _finally_ beginning to grok the state machine of
> the business objects.
Heh. I always thought it was fairly straightforward. :)
> But that bit of unposting/reposting invoices bothers me. I understand
> the argument--especially w
On Wednesday, December 15, 2004, at 06:47 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Hi,
Sounds about right.
The only comment I have is that I wouldn't call them invariants, or,
at least, not everything you've labeled is an invariant. As you
noticed, unposting an invoice does not maintain them all. This is not
a bu
Hi,
Rich Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to get a handle on the TaxTable/BillTerm parent/child
> relationship; with an eye towards documenting it. What follows comes
>>From scanning the code and reading src/doc/business.txt.
>
> Looking at just Invoice and TaxTable for now, it a
I'm trying to get a handle on the TaxTable/BillTerm parent/child
relationship; with an eye towards documenting it. What follows comes
from scanning the code and reading src/doc/business.txt.
Looking at just Invoice and TaxTable for now, it appears that the
invariants for these objects should i
