Philip

That's a great idea, (the queue part), but not how it's done now.  This queue 
thing is useful on many levels.  It provides a super way of synchronizing 
multiple data centers when one happens to go offline for a while.

Skip

-----Original Message-----
From: Phillip Rhodes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 8:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: timesheet status



Sounds like fun stuff.
Is your autoposting design and implementation well under way?

I would advocate for a queue type of system.  One can publish a "invoice 
created" message onto the queue, and the other systems can be subscribers on 
the queue and process the message.

In my past life, I was a b2b  integration specialist and dealt with 
tibco/interconnect/etc/.

Phillip


----- Original Message -----
From: "David E Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 9:01:06 PM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
Subject: Re: timesheet status


By auto-posting I mean automatically posting GL entries for system  
events related to financially important artifacts like invoices,  
payments, inventory, and so on.

-David


On Oct 10, 2007, at 6:37 PM, Phillip C. Rhodes wrote:

> David,
> By autoposting, do you mean OFX integration to bank systems to  
> import bank transactions into the system?  Or is autoposting  
> something else?
>
> Phillip
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David E Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 4:34:38 PM (GMT-0500) America/ 
> New_York
> Subject: Re: timesheet status
>
>
> On Oct 10, 2007, at 1:56 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
>> Currently the timesheet in workeffort does not seem to have a
>> status. Is
>> there a reason for that?
>>
>> It would be nice if a user can indicate that his timesheet is  
>> complete
>> by changing the status accordingly.
>>
>> Then when the timesheet is invoiced the status could be changed to
>> 'invoiced' which would prevent the user further changing the
>> timesheet.
>>
>> Anybody any thoughts on this?
>
> Yeah, a few thoughts:
>
> 1. helping the user know what is up with their stuff is great
>
> 2. the danger with statuses is that they can be redundant
> information, and we want to avoid that (for example, we do not have
> statuses on the OrderHeader for shipment and invoice and payment
> related things, those are attached to their respective entities); for
> Timesheets I'm not sure if they really have a status that it makes
> sense to manually change
>
> 3. a Timesheet is meant to contain time entries from one date/time to
> another date/time, for 2 weeks perhaps (to correspond with their pay
> period or something), so determining whether the time sheet is active
> or not should be determined this way
>
> 4. the billing of the related TimeEntry records may be attached to
> various different WorkEfforts and could be billed on different
> invoices for the same Timesheet, so that should be determined by
> looking at all invoices related to the various time entries related
> to it
>
> 5. it might be nice to have a manual status to denote that all time
> entries for the period have been entered, because it is normal that
> people enter time either all at once based on a paper form, or on a
> daily/hourly basis if they enter time right after each block of work,
> but even in the second scenario sometimes people forget to enter
> hours right away and hours could come in after the time period for
> the Timesheet has passed
>
> Any other statuses anyone can think of?
>
> BTW, it's great to see work going on in this area... I am continually
> frustrated with project management software. We're a month into using
> a commercial product right now and it's okay, but there are lots of
> things we can't do, it's expensive as we have to pay for each
> employee or client agent we want to have access the system, and in
> general it would be great to have something based on a more flexible
> data model (and one that we're familiar with and can manipulate!) so
> we're definitely moving toward creating a OFBiz-based system. All of
> our efforts are going back into OFBiz, but of course it is just
> progressing as we have unused resources (and competing with other
> OFBiz enhancement efforts we are working on like a good service-level
> automated test suite, and fleshing out the accounting component so to
> do the auto-posting and reporting so that one does not have to use a
> certain HPL/commercial licensed product to do that). For our early
> stuff, see the workeffort and projectmgr components.
>
> -David
>
>



Reply via email to