2014-07-16 14:45 GMT+02:00 Cédric Krier <cedric.kr...@b2ck.com>: > On 11 Jul 10:35, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: >> It's been commented in the past the fact that it would make sense to >> add a workflow to parties so that a certain state is required in order >> to confirm or process a sale order, a purchase, invoices, etc. >> Probably the sales department should be able to create new parties but >> we must be sure we have the VAT, a credit limit assigned and other >> information before we can accept a sale order, for example. >> >> To implement that we need several workflows. At least one for customer >> and one for supplier. And this brings me to think that maybe what we >> need is a Customer model and a Supplier model, the same way we have an >> Employee model linked to the Party. This would mean that >> customer/supplier payment_term, account information, etc would be >> moved into those new models which I think makes a lot of sense. >> >> Any thoughts on this? > > I think it is wrong. > Parties are referential data and so they should not have a workflow. > Also I think it is bad UX if for some reason a salesmen could not find a > party when trying to do a sale because it is the best way to start to > have duplicate entries.
Indeed I expected to be possible to add the party to the sale but not to continue until the party is accepted as a customer. > For me, the application must be configured to provide by default the > less restrictive configuration for party regarding taxes, accounting > etc. Which means it should set by default the party as if you do not > know anything about it. For example, for VAT it should provide the worst > case (full rate) because you will have no trouble (with the > administration) to invoice someone on full rate even if he could have a > reduced rate. > > After that, you can of course add check on the validation of the sale, > to ensure the configuration of the party is right. For example, you > could add a flag on the accounting party to be checked by accountant > once they verify the accounting property etc. In fact that was the idea. Only that I suggested to make it look more like a workflow. Part of this is company-specific but there are some requirements of such workflow that many companies do (or would like to do), so I'm not sure we can create some module to be inherited and customized per company. It is not an urgent requirement for us but maybe I'll give it some thought and try to come up with some generic modules in the future. > But one thing we are missing is the good default access right on fields > of the referential data (party, product etc.) because they contain data > from many part of the application (accounting, sale, purchase etc.) Sure. Any improvement in this area will be nice to have. > > -- > Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL > Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com > Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 > Website: http://www.b2ck.com/ -- Albert Cervera i Areny Tel. 93 553 18 03 @albertnan www.NaN-tic.com
