On 11 Sep 11:58, Sebastián Marró wrote:
> 2014-09-11 7:37 GMT-03:00 Cédric Krier <[email protected]>:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > Following my attempt to improve the situation of multi-company [1], I
> > faced so much problem that I only see to solution:
> >
> >     - a very complicate one where many things will become a list per
> >       company. For example on product, the prices, the accounts etc.
> >       This will make the code very complicate but also the user
> >       interface.
> >
> >     - a very simple, drop company.
> 
> 
> >
> > I start thinking that the last one is the right move even if it will
> > prevent none single company database to migrate.
> >
> 
> That could be a huge problem for a multi company instance in production
> that we have.
> 
> 
> >
> > What are the use case of multi-company?
> >
> > - accounting consolidation
> >
> >     It is a reporting issue that should be fixed by BI
> >
> 
> Ok, but it's not the same as open a custom account consolidation report in
> the Tryton client

Nothing prevents to open the BI from Tryton client.

> >
> > - sharing party
> >
> >     That's a good one if you forget that parties have many properties
> >     directly linked to the company like the accounts, tax rules etc.
> >     And I think this can be acheived by using a synchronisation of the
> >     common data using for example the CardDAV or any other similar
> >     protocol.
> >
> > - sharing product
> >
> >     Quite similar to party expect that it has much more company related
> >     properties.
> >     So again it could be implemented using a synchronisation mechanism.
> >     I know there are product description message in EDI, so it could be
> >     a way.
> >
> 
> Those synchronisation solutions don't seem to be trivial

I don't think so because we are talking about referencial data only.
As far as you define a master that even become simplier.
And for the record, CardDAV is designed to be used for synchronisation.

> >
> > I don't see any other cases.
> >
> 
> - sharing users

Can be done via LDAP.

> - sharing groups

Indeed this is an other failure of the current design.
Why would a user have the same rights on every company.
Anyway, such configuration could be managed by extending the LDAP
module.

> Very important for the IT department, if you have many of them.

> > So when I imagine the simplification of removing the company, I really
> > think it deserve the annoyance of breaking the migration.
> > And for such cases, a way to go could be to duplicate the DB and drop on
> > each the other the companies.
> >
> 
> I think that not supporting multi company in Tryton is a step back and that
> this will prevent migration to new versions.

multi-company is also a brake to improvement, to scalibility and to user
experience.
Indeed a little bit like the multi-database.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: [email protected]
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

Attachment: pgpTEg94sYaET.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to