Comment by [email protected]:
I think it can be dropped and just be managed by level. And if some as really specific usage case of it it could be added by an other module.
I don't think that is possible. It's not a special use case that needs the definition of dunning procedures but the general one. Dunning procedures are similar to payment terms. The analogue of dunning levels would be payment term lines. You cannot get rid of payment terms and just use payment term lines the same way you can't drop dunning procedures and just use dunning levels.
The use case is that you have different types of customers you want to treat differently during dunning. For example, there are some customers that you want to remind frequently about open receivables and thread with legal measures soon. There are others that you only politely remind after a long period of time (e.g. because of their credit worthiness).
Ok. But naming schema doesn't reflect well the structure.
> >You mean a Many2One??? to "ir.action.report"?
>Yes.
O.K. And the report should be configurable per dunning procedure or per dunning level? In the first case the report would contain some Relatorio conditional with different texts for every dunning level which is very flexible. In the second case the user would have to define 3 identical reports with only the text being different. What I see as a problem in both cases, compared to having a fields.Text(translate=True), is that it is difficult for the user to define translatable texts. And the dunning text should be translatable as it should match the language of the customer.
I think it should be possible to have different report per level using a link but it doesn't force to have different reports. We could have a default one which is using a text from the level.
It is to separate the accounting stuff which has some hard constraint and the management stuffs. Moreover, it will simplify the access right management because I don't think the dunning user will need to have write access to accounting.
IMO it is accounting stuff and not management stuff. In all companies that I have seen, dunning is always done by accountants. Some bigger companies have separate accountants for accounts receivables, accounts payables and asset accounting etc. In that case it would be done by a accounts receivable accountant.
Any way, I don't see any advantage to have it hard-linked to accounting. But there are advantages to not have it.
For more information: https://code.google.com/p/tryton/wiki/DunningModule -- -- [email protected] mailing list
