+1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks all your suggestions. > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow lead to > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to use > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the discussed > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and most > flexible way. > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's cut a > JIRA to proceed with it. > > Thanks, > Swapnil > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Yong [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > Hi all, > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or without > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory > transfer functionalities in the future. > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment > > Regards, > James Yong > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[email protected]> wrote: > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment > > Type ââ¬ËTransfer Shipmentââ¬â¢. And allow to have these ROs processed > > through this single transfer shipment. > > What it would mean is that: > > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ââ¬ËBill/Ship From > > Vendorââ¬â¢ and > > ââ¬ËBill/Ship to Customerââ¬â¢ party id (as long as both > > originating and > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or business > > entity). > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items (even > > if it means overriding existing reservations). > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a > > single ââ¬ËTransfer Shipmentââ¬â¢ during picking. > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then move > > its status to ââ¬ËShippedââ¬â¢. At the same time linked > > ROââ¬â¢s status can > > also be > > marked as ââ¬ËShippedââ¬â¢. This should affect the on Hand to the > > tune of > > shipped > > units. > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against linked > > RO. > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ââ¬ËReceiveââ¬â¢ the > > ââ¬ËShippedââ¬â¢ RO > > (similar to > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that was > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to > > the > > tune of received units. > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment to > > ââ¬ËReceivedââ¬â¢ status. And at the same time linked RO can also > > be > > marked as > > ââ¬ËCompletedââ¬â¢. > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the > > process > > wherever needed. > > > > > > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over > > complicated. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. > > > > > > > > Thanks James for the reply. > > > > > > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory > > transfer. > > > > > > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase > > order. > > > > > > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that > > order is > > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same). > > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus > > entity. > > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. > > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. > > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. > > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products > > at a > > > > time. > > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model. > > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer > > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with > > inventory > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > Please correct me if I missed something. > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > > > > > > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: > > > > > > > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. > > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support > > > inventory > > > > > transfer with shipment. > > > > > > > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as > > > discussed > > > > > earlier) > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock > > > > > > transfer flow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., > > > > so > > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity. > > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of > > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current > > implementation) : > > > > > > > > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but > > > > > > there > > > > > is > > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and > > > > receiver > > > > > > as > > > > > they > > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So > > business > > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or > > > > > purchase > > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real > > > > > > time > > > > > payment > > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. > > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its > > > > applicability > > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or > > > > > > country/state-specific > > > > > tax > > > > > > regulations. For example: > > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state > > > > might be > > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at > > > > > > different rate in > > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax > > > > > > regulations can > > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company > > > > > > goods transfer > > > > > > are even taxable or not) > > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods > > > > transfer > > > > > > is > > > > > now > > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: > > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in > > > > this > > > > > > case, only a separate ââ¬ÅTax Invoiceâ⬠* needs to be > > > > issued > > > > > > along > > > > > with > > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on > > > > > > the inter-state > > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) > > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having > > > > single > > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches with > > > > > > tax authority then *there > > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be > > issue. > > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods. > > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having > > > > > different > > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches with > > > > > > tax authority then *there > > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate ââ¬ÅTax > > > > > Invoiceâ⬠* > > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. > > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to > > > > the > > state > > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in > > > > this > > case. > > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status > > > > transitioning > > > > > > i.e. ââ¬ËRequestedââ¬â¢ à ââ¬ËIn-reviewââ¬â¢ à > > > > ââ¬ËShippedââ¬â¢ (from > > > > originating > > > > > facility) à > > > > > > ââ¬ËIn-transitââ¬â¢ à ââ¬ËReceivedââ¬â¢ (at > > > > destination facility). > > > > As it needs to > > be > > > > > > tracked internally. > > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the > > > > > transferred > > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL > > > > > > accounts > > > > > per > > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in > > > > > accordance > > > > > > with business rules). > > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically > > > > > > build > > > > > the > > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the > > > > individual > > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement > > > > for > > > > > > a > > > > > common > > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets > > > > > > implemented) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution > > > > that > > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[email protected] > > > > <[email protected]>] > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as > > > > mentioned > > > > > earlier > > > > > > to manage group transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable > > > > > > since > > > > > we > > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to > > > > enable > > > > > > shipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is > > > > selected, > > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be > > created. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can > > > > only > > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to > > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business > > > > > > > > > > > > > Requirements > > > > > > > > > > > > > like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one > > > > > > > product > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > any inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > > > > Shipment > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > > > > > missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > > > > > > Accounting > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > > > > is missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" > > > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) > > > > > with > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > respective transfer order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order > > > > > > > > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a > > > > > > > "Transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO > > > > > should > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the > > > > > PO > > > > > > > > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product" > > > > > workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < > > > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes James, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., > > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[email protected] > > > > > > > > <[email protected] > > > > > >] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > > > > > records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common > > > > > > > > info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single > > > > > > > shipment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > product). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the > > > > > > > existing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > single transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as > > > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail > > etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[email protected] < > > > > > [email protected]>] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory > > > > > > > > > Item > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the > > > > > > > > > Inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Transfer table. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item > > > > > > > > > > Detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > table? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store > > > > > > > > > transferred > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and > > > > > > > > > > > quantity > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. > > > > > > > > > > > Problem > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get > > > > > > > > > exact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history > > > > > maintenance > > > > > > of records. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > *HotWax > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme no. > > > > > > > > > 78, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
