Here are my time slots Romania local time: 29 Thu 15:00 to 20:00 30 Fri available from 17:00 31 Sat available from 14:00 01 Sun pretty much all day 03 Tue 07:00 to 11:00 or 15:00 to 18:00 04-06 available after 17:00
GMT time: 29 Thu 12:00 to 17:00 30 Fri available from 14:00 31 Sat available from 11:00 01 Sun pretty much all day 03 Tue 04:00 to 08:00 or 12:00 to 15:00 04-06 available after 14:00 Groza Danut On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, 13:04 Pierre Smits, <[email protected]> wrote: > Please include your country, so we can factor in timezone corrections (if > needed). > > Met vriendelijke groet, > > Pierre Smits > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/> since > 2008 (without privileges) > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 11:55 AM Pierre Smits <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Emad, Groza, all, >> >> If you can provide me with a few date and time slots, I can schedule >> something that might be least inconvenient for all. >> >> Met vriendelijke groet, >> >> Pierre >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:14 AM Groza Danut <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Pierre, >>> >>> I would also be interested in this. Do you think the brewery process >>> would >>> also apply to coffee shops, for the process manufacturing of coffees? >>> >>> Groza Danut >>> >>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, 11:02 Emad Radwan, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > That will be great. I'm in, anytime. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Emad >>> > >>> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 9:33 AM Pierre Smits <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Hi Emad, All >>> > > >>> > > How about scheduling a 30-60 minutes video conference where I give a >>> > > walk-through based on my BMS 4 Brewery solution? >>> > > >>> > > IMO, that would give the most bang-for-buck for you allowing for an >>> > higher >>> > > interaction and addressing questions without having to wait going >>> through >>> > > longer cycles. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Met vriendelijke groet, >>> > > >>> > > Pierre Smits >>> > > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/> >>> > since >>> > > 2008 (without privileges) >>> > > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 >>> > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* >>> > > >>> > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 1:27 PM Emad Radwan <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Hello Pierre, >>> > >> >>> > >> Many thanks. I now understand the difference between WIP as a >>> product >>> > type >>> > >> and as an inventory and accounting concept. I also - correct me if >>> I am >>> > >> wrong - understand that in 'ProductionRunDeclaration.groovy ' it >>> > requires >>> > >> product type NOT to be WIP in order to 'produce'. However, and as I >>> > >> understand better from data and code, could you kindly share - from >>> your >>> > >> mentioned implementation - those records that explain the >>> relationship >>> > >> between the different production runs? data from ProductAssocs and >>> > >> WorkEffortAssocs will give me a clearer understanding. >>> > >> >>> > >> Regards, >>> > >> Emad >>> > >> >>> > >> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 10:39 AM Pierre Smits < >>> [email protected]> >>> > >> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> > Hi Emad, all, >>> > >> > >>> > >> > First, for a better understanding of what a WIP product is about >>> have >>> > a >>> > >> > look at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/workinprogress.asp >>> > >> > >>> > >> > A WIP product is in essence a a means to facilitate asset value >>> > >> > calculation at the end of a reporting period (month, quarter, >>> year). >>> > >> > >>> > >> > So, it depends.... Not only on the complexity of the BOM and >>> schema >>> > >> steps, >>> > >> > but also on when the financial/fiscal reporting requirements (like >>> > e.g. >>> > >> > when the reporting year ends). >>> > >> > >>> > >> > If you have a production schema which has steps that can lead to a >>> > step >>> > >> in >>> > >> > a production run going from one day to the next, it can run from >>> one >>> > >> > reporting period to the next (e.g. long duration steps in the >>> brewing >>> > >> > process, where fermentation/maturing can take multiple days, or >>> even >>> > >> short >>> > >> > steps happening in evening/night shifts). >>> > >> > In such a case you can use the WIP classification as production >>> type. >>> > >> But >>> > >> > I would say this adds additional accounting complexities in your >>> > setup, >>> > >> > that need to be investigated and tested. >>> > >> > >>> > >> > in the first iteration of me implementing OFBiz for breweries ( >>> see >>> > >> #1), >>> > >> > I started out with defining a single BOM and associated production >>> > >> schema >>> > >> > to get to the first finished product (beer), but that led to a >>> unique >>> > >> > schema for each style/variant of beer. Which made production >>> planning >>> > >> (and >>> > >> > reporting) a nightmare. Breaking up such a production schema (and >>> its >>> > >> BOM) >>> > >> > into multiple (dependent/linked schemas) made life easier wrt >>> using >>> > >> OFBiz >>> > >> > regarding production planning and execution, registration of >>> inventory >>> > >> > movements and resource utilization, and reporting (accounting) on >>> > asset >>> > >> > value and costs. >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > #1: >>> > >> > >>> > >> >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Brewing+with+OFBiz+at+a+small+or+medium+sized+brewery >>> > >> > >>> > >> > I trust the above helps you in finding the optimal solution for >>> your >>> > >> > 'unique' business case/scenario. Should you have additional >>> questions >>> > >> > and/or remarks, feel free to reach out. >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Met vriendelijke groet, >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Pierre Smits >>> > >> > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz < >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/> >>> > >> since >>> > >> > 2008 (without privileges) >>> > >> > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 >>> > >> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 10:31 AM Emad Radwan < >>> [email protected]> >>> > >> > wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > >> >> Hello Pierre, >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> Few clarifications, please. First, for the new products that >>> we'll >>> > >> create >>> > >> >> - using your explanation above - is it correct to say that >>> they'll be >>> > >> >> 'intermediate' products with 'WIP' product type? >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> Second, Can we have the the whole process - while having the >>> > >> possibility >>> > >> >> to declare intermediate products - in a single production run or >>> it >>> > >> >> requires 'child' production runs? >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> If the process above can fit in one production run, then what >>> > >> >> configuration is required to make this happen? >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> Regards, >>> > >> >> Emad >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 2:02 PM Emad Radwan < >>> [email protected]> >>> > >> >> wrote: >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >>> Hello Pierre, >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> Many thanks for the detailed explanation. I have a number of >>> > >> >>> follow-up questions that I'll get back to you on in the next few >>> > days >>> > >> as I >>> > >> >>> review the relevant code to make sure I'm asking the right >>> > questions. >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> Regards, >>> > >> >>> Emad >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 1:36 PM Pierre Smits < >>> > [email protected]> >>> > >> >>> wrote: >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>>> Hi Emad, >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> A production run to produce Asprin sounds like a >>> process-oriented >>> > >> >>>> manufacturing method (similar to producing 'scrambled eggs' you >>> > >> can't unmix >>> > >> >>>> the Asprin mixture). >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> If you have a requirement for 100.000 tablets, I would break it >>> > down >>> > >> to >>> > >> >>>> multiple production schemas to keep it simple: 1 for producing >>> the >>> > >> mixture, >>> > >> >>>> 1 for producing the tablets from the mixture, and 1 for >>> packaging >>> > the >>> > >> >>>> tablets. The reason for this is to factoring the waste aspects >>> for >>> > >> the >>> > >> >>>> production runs, but also to have intermediate inventory >>> > >> registration: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> 1. in the mixture process, residue could remain in the >>> mixing >>> > and >>> > >> >>>> transport equipment leading to 100% (of the weight) of >>> > >> ingredients going in >>> > >> >>>> results in > 100% of output. E.g. 100 kg of ingredients > >>> 98 kg >>> > >> of mixture >>> > >> >>>> 2. in the tablet production process, again 100% of the >>> mixture >>> > of >>> > >> 1 >>> > >> >>>> (98 kg) could lead to > 100% of output. >>> > >> >>>> 3. in the packaging process, the tablets registered in 2 may >>> > lead >>> > >> >>>> to the last container (box, bag, etc.) not having the >>> correct >>> > >> quantity. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Thus process 1 (schema 1) should have a weight step at the end, >>> > which >>> > >> >>>> could account for the actual going into an intermediate >>> inventory >>> > >> product >>> > >> >>>> And process (schema2) should have a 'tablet' counter at the >>> end to >>> > >> >>>> determine the 'actual' quantity of produced tablets that goes >>> into >>> > >> >>>> inventory. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Also, given that you're talking about a food related product, >>> > >> batch/lot >>> > >> >>>> registration is essential. Mixing different batches/lots from >>> > >> production >>> > >> >>>> run 1 and 2 to get to the required output (100.000 tablets) >>> would >>> > >> introduce >>> > >> >>>> unmanageable risks. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Now, coming back to your ask about the 'Declare' on a task, >>> this >>> > >> would >>> > >> >>>> do something similar within a production run. In a production >>> run >>> > >> task you >>> > >> >>>> can 'declare' the output of a task (e.g. the mixture), which is >>> > then >>> > >> the >>> > >> >>>> starting point of the next task (but I have found it to be more >>> > >> difficult >>> > >> >>>> to explain regarding waste, by-products and batch/lot >>> registration, >>> > >> when I >>> > >> >>>> introduced OFBiz as a Brewery Management Solution at several >>> > >> breweries). >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> I trust the above helps. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Met vriendelijke groet, >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Pierre >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 8:33 PM Emad Radwan < >>> [email protected] >>> > > >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>>> Hello Community, >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>>> Assume I have a routing for Asprin - a batch of 100000 >>> tablets - >>> > >> >>>>> manufacturing where there're 7 tasks to make the product. >>> Lets say >>> > >> >>>>> that in >>> > >> >>>>> the first 5 tasks we didn't reach the 'tablet' form yet. My >>> > question >>> > >> >>>>> is, >>> > >> >>>>> why the 'Declare' button for one of those tasks is available? >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>>> By pressing 'declare' we have a form to edit the task where >>> some >>> > >> >>>>> fields I >>> > >> >>>>> understand like actual timings but I don't get fields like >>> > >> >>>>> QuantityProduced >>> > >> >>>>> for such tasks where we don't have a 'finished product' yet. >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>>> Also appear another form - in the - Production Run Declaration >>> > >> section >>> > >> >>>>> - >>> > >> >>>>> that allow to add an inventory item for 'any' product the user >>> > >> selects! >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>>> Do you find it logical to have the above visible for such >>> middle >>> > >> >>>>> tasks? Is >>> > >> >>>>> there a way to configure it to display with tasks that will >>> > actually >>> > >> >>>>> deliver the finished product? >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>>> Are the uses cases for this that I'm missing? >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>>> Regards, >>> > >> >>>>> Emad >>> > >> >>>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >>> >>
