I agree. That's why I will not include the removal of the payment screenlet in the patch.
Regards, Pierre 2009/10/21 Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> > From: "Pierre Smits" <[email protected]> > >> I will create the JIRA and upload stuff. >> The payment method screenlet is just removed from CommonScreens.xml in >> Marketing. I was trying out some stuff in my development environment >> (where >> I created the image from. >> >> In my opinion not everything related to parties should be shown in SFA. >> SFA >> officers should be focusing on registering sales, opportunities, request >> and >> such. Banking info should not be displayed to them, as I regard it a >> AR/AP/Accounting data element. >> > > Maybe, but this needs discussion because if it was added there chances are > that someone needed it and use it > > Jacques > > > Regards, >> >> Pierre >> >> 2009/10/21 Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> >> >> Pierre, >>> >>> OFBiz ML (and Apache at large) don't let attachment get through. >>> Fortunately I received an email copy with the screen copy. >>> It looks good to me, I suggest that you create a Jira, attache the screen >>> copy and a patch, but what did you do with the payment method screenlet ? >>> >>> Jacques >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Pierre Smits >>> To: [email protected] ; Jacques Le Roux >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:41 AM >>> Subject: Re: Requests and Quotes & SFA Manager >>> >>> >>> For my own purposes I have rearranged the layout of the Account Profile >>> a >>> bit. See attached image. >>> >>> >>> If this is liked and should be included in the application I can create >>> patched and upload them. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> >>> 2009/10/21 Pierre Smits <[email protected]> >>> >>> Keeping it simple often works. >>> >>> >>> I agree that clear requierements should be outlined before we start >>> heading of in any direction. >>> >>> >>> With regards to SugarCRM: they have kept it simple visavis their >>> overviews and actions. Having looked at openCRX (as Abdullah mentioned it >>> earlier) I would say that it looks a lot like SugarCRM (with some >>> complexities like OfBIZ). >>> >>> >>> So yeah. Bringing overviews of details together on the profile of an >>> account should be easy to do and enhance the workability for an >>> SFA-officer. >>> I would like to see that the 'create new'-functions to a nemu section >>> on >>> each SFA-screen (we already have quick add for contacts and leads). But >>> adding new accounts, opportunities and forecasts requires going to their >>> respective overviews. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I will look at the business process library. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> >>> 2009/10/21 Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> Hi Pierre, >>> >>> At this stage I wonder if we should not begin by providing clear >>> requirements using stories as it's done at >>> >>> >>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBREQDES/Universal+Business+Process+Library+Index >>> . >>> At least having a look there should not hurt... >>> On the other hand, a simpler way would be to simply mimic SugarCRM >>> UI. >>> I have done a quick analysis for such a work, it seems not >>> hard to do. IIRW, the only really missing things are the ticket >>> feature and graphics. Most of the work is about linking things together. >>> For instance tasks (workefforts), other accounts associated to an >>> account (we have already related contacts). Or tasks, contacts relates to >>> an >>> opportunity (we have already lead but only one it seems), etc. >>> >>> Of course with its daslet feature SugarCRM is a bit easier to use >>> than >>> our portlets, but it's not so far. >>> Also SugarCRM has some convenient lookups and actions on each screen. >>> For instance I found their information icon showing address, telephone >>> number, etc. on each line of a lookup result, interesting... >>> >>> My 2 cts >>> >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[email protected]> >>> >>> Hi Jacques, >>> You are on the money there. I think that the ecommerce solution in >>> OfBIZ can >>> be regarded as Best in Class. And with a little effort the CRM/SFA >>> module >>> can be the same. Most of the functionalities, as you pointed out, >>> are >>> already in place. It is just bringing it together. Having that it >>> will drive >>> the acceptance of a good CRM/SFA solution for customers and >>> can/will >>> lead to >>> having a better acceptance of OfBIZ as a whole (both from customer >>> and >>> developer (SI) point of view). >>> >>> Therefore I would also advice to split up the Marketing module in a >>> MARCOM >>> application (which is more about marketing and communication - with >>> their >>> own business processes) and a CRM application (which is by most >>> perceived as >>> SFA). >>> >>> In my opinion the CRM/SFA should be the starting point for getting >>> all the >>> info of an account/prospect/customer regarding: >>> Opportunities, >>> Request >>> Orders >>> Contacts >>> etc. >>> >>> When the page of an account is shown the focus should also be on >>> how >>> to >>> contact the account (contact mechs) and the associated contacts >>> (showing >>> phone and email contact mechs). >>> >>> The SFA officials should be able to create, read, update and delete >>> from >>> there. >>> >>> But also security solutions should be up to specs. >>> >>> I also think that the starterpage of SFA should have some charts >>> showing the >>> pipeline of all account opportunities (maybe that is some >>> BI-functionality). >>> This functionality could then also be shown on the profile of the >>> account., >>> including showing total value of sales of YtD, and last year. >>> >>> It's the simple things that make it (life also) better to bear. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> PS Could you (and others) also comment on my email regarding Market >>> Segment >>> & Sales Segment? >>> >>> 2009/10/20 Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> Hi Pierre, >>> >>> Yes it sounds like a reasonnable requirement to me. Some of the >>> problems we >>> get when trying to convince prospects to use OFBiz is >>> that they want something like SugarCRM. Almost all is there, but >>> not as >>> easy as in SugarCRM... >>> I guess that's why Opentaps was created in the 1st place, because >>> Si >>> quickly identified the need and filled it. BTW, I think we miss >>> after sales features in OFBiz (like tokens in SugarCRM). This >>> could >>> certainly be implemented using what exists already in OFBiz (ie >>> we don't need much changes in the data model if any, using >>> workeffort for >>> instance) but has still to be done at the UI level. >>> >>> A prospective customer (French international enterprise of middle >>> size) >>> told me recently that he would prefer to have an easier to use >>> SFA/CRM than an accounting module, because he has already his own >>> accouting >>> system and do not want to change. >>> Also he wondered how much changes would be implied if ever he >>> would like to >>> change, because he think the accouting module is >>> formated to US practices. I don't think so (I think it's general >>> enough and >>> may be quickly adapted) but as I have not worked much >>> with the OFBiz accouting system yet, I had not much arguments to >>> expose, >>> and was not even quite sure of them. So I ask accouting >>> specialists : what >>> is your point of view on this aspect ? >>> >>> My 2cts >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[email protected]> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Shouldn't requests, quotes and the like be visible from the SFA >>> Manager? >>> And >>> should users be also able to create new requests, quotes e.a. >>> from there? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
