[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1134?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12511377
]
Iain Fogg commented on OFBIZ-1134:
----------------------------------
Jacopo,
I have to admit that I've only looked very briefly at MRP. Is there some
decent docs on this capability?
For our needs, the "old" requirement method works well enough. One
advantage of the old requirement methods was that we could easily
distinguish requirements that were a consequence of a customer order
versus those that were a result of re-stocking. The former always had
the facilityId, whereas the latter had a null facilityId. This is
actually pretty important, because if we are re-stocking we can often
leave the PO until we have an economic quantity, but when we need to
fulfil a customer order we usually have to take proactive measures to
source the item for the customer in a timely manner.
I'm interested to know if MRP and/or the "new" requirements methods have
some easy mechanism for us to distinguish customer orders vs reorders?
Cheers, Iain
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/891 - Release Date: 8/07/2007 6:32
PM
> Inconsistent treatment of null search parameters
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OFBIZ-1134
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1134
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: order
> Affects Versions: SVN trunk
> Reporter: Iain Fogg
> Assignee: Jacopo Cappellato
> Fix For: SVN trunk
>
>
> Prelude:
> To easily observe this problem, you need to modify a form definition. In
> applications/order/webapp/ordermgr/requirement/RequirementForms.xml to allow
> the facilityId field to accept an empty value by changing <drop-down
> allow-empty="true">.
> Assumption:
> + Your list of approved requirements include some with and without a value
> for facilityId.
> Scenario:
> + In the OrderMgr application, go to the "Requirements" screen and select
> "Approved Product Requirements".
> + By default, the Supplier field will be empty, and the form displays all
> requirements for all suppliers, irrespective of facilityId.
> + Select a Supplier (preferrably one with some requirements with a facilityId
> and some without), leave the facilityId empty, do the lookup, and the result
> is an empty list. Select a valid facilityId, do the lookup, and it returns
> the list of requirements for than supplier that have the relevant facilityId.
> + Clear the facilityId AND the Supplier, do the lookup, and you get the full
> list of approved requirements.
> For some reason, the application correctly interprets an empty facilityId as
> DON'T CARE when there Supplier is empty, but is doing something else when a
> Supplier is selected.
> Note: I observe this problem because I am testing on a snapshot of a
> production database that include requirements that may or may not have the
> facilityId field populated. In fact, the reason I have lots of requirements
> without a facilityId is because these are being generated by the Requirement
> Method Enum related secas. (Not sure if that is important but thought I'd
> mention it).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
