there are some companies that require a timesheet to be entered within a
certain time period. if Not then there is no payment.
Please keep that in mind.

Hans Bakker sent the following on 10/10/2007 10:54 PM:
> Back to the subject of timesheets? :-)
> 
> Thanks David for you extensive answer. I agree with you that we should
> not enter status fields everywhere; a reference should block the data
> from updating.
> 
> We do however need a flag where the user indicates that the timesheet is
> complete and that it can be 'processed'. This processing should create a
> link to the invoice, via workeffort if required, which should block the
> timesheet-entry from update.
> 
> Perhaps we need later a report which will show the timesheet entries
> which were not processed.......
> 
> I will propose the customer this solution.
> 
> Regards,
> Hans
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 14:34 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
>> 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