On 18 Apr 05:47, Simon Klemenc wrote: > > > To my opinion this would be more consistent with invoicing for example, > > and > > > on top of that it seems fiscal authorities in our country might become > > > suspicious if there is a lot of missing numbers... (even with shipments) > > > > I have very very very hight doubt that any authorities care about how > > you number your shipments. > > > > > Despite your doubts, they actually do when they see a lot of missing > numbers. > In fact when they test your company, everything thats not in-line could > make them suspicious.
I don't buy that at all. This is crazy stupid. You have never in your life print something with a mistake? And even, there is absolutely nothing wrong with how Tryton manage this internal code. It just reflect the reality, if you have a mistake and you cancel one shipment, it is correct that the new one will have a new number. Excepting the opposite from an administration will be just a request from them to falsify the documents, so exactly the opposite of what the should request. > > > (Also different naming (reference / code) irritates me a bit, but that > > > might be personal...) > > > > This is the naming of Tryton. Everything that is to identify internally > > document is named "code" when "reference" is to identify from external. > > > > I dont understand.. > How is a shipment note internal, while an invoice is external? Because the number of invoice is not an internal reference. This is why it is named number and not code. Numbering invoice is a very very common requirement in many countries with a specific need. So that's why it is external otherwise in practice there is no need to reference an invoice inside the company, in the opposite of a shipment. -- Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL Email/Jabber: [email protected] Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
