+1
Jacques
Le 21/11/2017 à 08:27, Scott Gray a écrit :
I agree with Paul that FinAccountTrans shouldn't reference orderId or
returnId. I have nothing to add, his reasoning is spot on.
Regards
Scott
On 21 November 2017 at 16:56, Paul Foxworthy <p...@cohsoft.com.au> wrote:
Hi Vaibhav,
I'm really uncomfortable about this.
As Pierre said, FinAccountTrans is for a transaction for a financial
account (likely a bank account), rather than a transaction on an account in
the accounting sense, i.e. an account in your chart of accounts.
So a FinAccountTrans records a deposit or withdrawal to a financial
account.
It has a foreign key for a Payment. The Payment has related
PaymentApplications, each of which apply some of the payment to an invoice.
An order may have one or more invoices, and an order may have one or more
shipments.
So a FinAccountTrans may have several associated orders, and several
associated shipments. Wouldn't it be an oversimplification to carry one and
only one shipmentId in a FinAccountTrans? And if there was one in
FinAccountTrans and anything in OFBiz used it, that would break the more
flexible data model that we have at the moment.
By the same token, I think a FinAccountTrans should not have an orderId
either - there might be more than one.
Am I missing something? Maybe what you really need is a view that
conveniently shows the shipment or shipments related to a FinAccountTrans .
Thanks
Paul Foxworthy
On 20 November 2017 at 23:41, Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav.j...@hotwaxsystems.com
wrote:
Hello all,
Currently, orderId field is available and returnId, shipmentId fields can
be introduced in the FinAccountTrans entity.
These fields are useful while recording fin account transactions.
Please let me know your thoughts on it.
Thanks in advance
Vaibhav Jain
Hotwax Systems,
vaibhav.j...@hotwaxsystems.com
--
Coherent Software Australia Pty Ltd
PO Box 2773
Cheltenham Vic 3192
Australia
Phone: +61 3 9585 6788
Web: http://www.coherentsoftware.com.au/
Email: i...@coherentsoftware.com.au
