On 03/06/13 16:38 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: > A Dilluns 03 Juny 2013 08:51:50, Cédric Krier va escriure: > > On 02/06/13 01:03 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: > > > A Dissabte 01 Juny 2013 23:34:51, Cédric Krier va escriure: > > > > For me, it is wrong to create many Sale/Quotation when you know only > > > > one could succeed. The solution already thought years ago, is to > > > > historize the sale (create many version) and be able to validate one. > > > > With your solution, there is still the possibility that many are > > > > validated by mistake and also any reports that will try to forecast the > > > > sales will be wrong. > > > > > > When you say historize you mean to use the _history flag? What if the > > > customer decides to choose version 2 when you already sent him version 3 > > > and 4? > > > > A wizard put back the version 2. > > > > > Do you > > > give several numbers to the different versions sent to the customer? > > > > Why not or simply the date. > > > > > Also, I think It is not unreasonable to send several quotations at once > > > for the same opportunity. Something like the quotation for the Big Truck > > > and the quotation for the Small Truck for the customer to choose. > > > > Could still be possible to select different to print. > > For me, all these solutions are too complex. If I send two different > quotations
If you say too complex:
- for the user, then it is just a matter of good UI design.
- for the devs, then all the code is already there.
> I prefer to have two quotations, not several revisions of the same one with
> wizards and so on.
But users don't care about the DB design. Revisions can be shown as
"records".
--
Cédric Krier
B2CK SPRL
Rue de Rotterdam, 4
4000 Liège
Belgium
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Email/Jabber: [email protected]
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpYqHEnyaKKO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
