I think the PO should be on the invoice header. In our scenario, we get a PO for a project, drop it into the Sales order, and have multiple invoices on that PO.
Having the PO in a specified field makes it easier for our customers to find on the invoice when they go to pay it, and also for us to show on a report/search for invoices associated with a PO. If we have multiple POs, we can always do multiple invoices -- these are probably associated with different contacts at a customer, anyway. What Erik describes is the same as our workflow, for our larger customers... Cheers, John On 10/07/2011 01:22 PM, Chris Travers wrote: > On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> In the schema you sent, you write that you intend to use one of the >> new links in the invoice table to get the PONumber field as it is >> currently available in the AR table. The links you're referring to are >> the "previous document" (sales order, sales request, etc) links. Let >> me describe my use-case where I think this linking system won't work >> for me. >> >> (Note that I'm involved in multiple businesses; the use-case below is >> a use-case from my self-employment. I'm not currently using LSMB to >> create invoices for that business, but I'm using the requirements as a >> showcase.) >> >> Because I have relatively few contracts (8 or 10 per year) in my >> self-employment business, I'm not creating sales orders for these >> contracts. I'm just creating the invoices directly, using my hours >> registrations and whatever additional requirements my customers have. >> >> One of my customers requires me to use *their* PO number to be on the >> invoice. They use it to link the digital and physical information >> flows: the physical invoice never actually reaches my contacts - >> instead it's being processed by a central processing office. Without >> that number, they can't link the invoice to the right file. Without >> that number, I won't be paid. > Ok, so question for everyone: Should the PO number field be on the > header or the invoice line item? I am thinking for now just to add it > to the header (since that is the way it's done right now) because it > is easier to go the to the other from here if we need to. > > But that still does bring up the question: Should client PO's map at > most 1:1 to invoices? or should we allow an invoice to invoice > delivery of goods and services off multiple PO's? If in doubt, I > think we should keep the current behavior for now while we evaluate, > but want to get feedback..... > > Best Wishes, > Chris Travers > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. > Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security > threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes > sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 > _______________________________________________ > Ledger-smb-devel mailing list > Ledger-smb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel > > !DSPAM:4e8f5fb1202861682214271! > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-devel mailing list Ledger-smb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel