Hi Hans,
Almost perfect: the product names are not used, and why not a specific icon for
them?
Also I wonder if we should not widen the left panel? I guess this width has
been set when the most used screen resolution was
800x600 it's now 1024x768
Thanks for your time!
Jacques
From: "Hans Bakker" <[email protected]>
> category/catalog tree updated in r1063625
>
> thanks for your comments!
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 11:06 +0100, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Jacopo,
>>
>> Well spotted! I have fixed your concern at r1059279. I wonder how I missed
that since I was inspired by
>> AgreementServices.getCommissionForProduct() :/
>>
>> Hans: also could you please look at the catalogs/categories tree: there is
only Ids in it, at least we should rather have the
>> names
>> (with the Ids would be better). Also, if we could have different icons for
catalogs and categories...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[email protected]>
>> >I think that we should not forget about this because the fix proposed by
Jacques (thanks for this) should be considered a
>> >temporary
>> >one... for example it doesn't take into account validity dates of the
relationship; as a side note, the same issue (validity
>> >dates
>> >ignored) was also in the original cod committed by Hans (see the
isAlternativePacking method).
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Jacopo
>> >
>> > On Jan 10, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Hans,
>> >>
>> >> This has introduced a bug I fixed at r1057153
>> >>
>> >> The isVirtual Product attribute shows around 160 times in
*form*.xml,*een*, *.gro*,*.ftl,*.java files. Of course I did not
>> >> check
>> >> them all. But I'd be surprised if your change has not introduced some
other side effects...
>> >>
>> >> Could youy please have a look?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Jacques
>> >>
>> >> From: "Hans Bakker" <[email protected]>
>> >>> This change is now implemented in r1040908
>> >>>
>> >>> Related to the comment from Scott, Instead of using the existing
>> >>> association, we have created a new product association 'Alternative
>> >>> Packaging' to not interfere with the usage of Scott.
>> >>>
>> >>> An explanation can be found at:
>> >>>
https://www.antwebsystems.com/content/control/ViewBlogArticle?articleContentId=16750&blogContentId=AWS_BLOG
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> Hans
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 16:06 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> >>>> i could also add a new association type "alternative Uom" and then still
>> >>>> use isVirtual=Y/isVariant=Y...which would not block your usage....
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 21:34 +1300, Scott Gray wrote:
>> >>>> > Hi Hans,
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > I'm still in favor of the approach that I suggested earlier and you haven't really mentioned why it wouldn't work for
>> >>>> > you.
>> >>>> > If > you like and if you are willing to wait a couple of days I could
show you what I mean with some example entity xml
>> >>>> > data.
>> >>>> > You > could then load it into a demo instance and play around with it.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > I haven't read your proposal in detail yet but I'm not really in favor of using the isVirtual=Y/isVariant=Y combination
>> >>>> > to
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > indicate uom specific behavior. I think it is quite possible for a
product to have that combination in real life and
>> >>>> > using
>> >>>> > it > for something else would remove that possibility. Imagine a variant that is itself also a virtual with its own
>> >>>> > child
>> >>>> > variants.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Regards
>> >>>> > Scott
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > HotWax Media
>> >>>> > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > On 11/11/2010, at 8:46 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > > A longer explanation how we want to implement this can be found at:
>> >>>> > >
http://www.antwebsystems.com/control/ViewBlogArticle?contentId=16750&blogContentId=AWS_BLOG
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > Regards,
>> >>>> > > Hans
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 16:52 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> >>>> > >> We are are still getting the best solution, help appreciated.
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> We are thinking of the following:
>> >>>> > >> you have a product which you sell in pieces and boxes of ten.
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> Then the product per piece is the lowest denominator and has a
variant
>> >>>> > >> association to a virtual/variant product which is an alternative
>> >>>> > >> packaging of the product per piece and can have an adjusted price
but no
>> >>>> > >> inventory.
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> Currently the e-commerce checks for the virtual flag and want to
show a
>> >>>> > >> feature selection list, however in the case of the virtual- and
variant
>> >>>> > >> flag both set, it should not.
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> When the box of 10 is selected, The productId per piece is
selected with
>> >>>> > >> the adjusted price of the box variant.
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> Comments very much appreciated.
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> Regards,
>> >>>> > >> Hans
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 12:13 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
>> >>>> > >>> For boxes of a product you'll usually have one product that represents the individual items (which may or may not
>> >>>> > >>> be
>> >>>> > >>> for
>> >>>> > >>> > >>> sale directly to the customer), and one that is a product that represents the box and that is associated
>> >>>> > >>> with
>> >>>> > >>> the >
>> >>>> > >>> >>> individual item. In OFBiz there are a few different product types you can choose from to have the system
>> >>>> > >>> handle
>> >>>> > >>> the
>> >>>> > >>> box in > >>> different ways automatically, or you can use plain
old Finished Good to handle the boxes manually.
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>> For certain products all you need is the three fields already on
the Product entity:
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>> quantityUomId
>> >>>> > >>> quantityIncluded
>> >>>> > >>> piecesIncluded
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>> For example if you have a six-pack of 12oz soda cans you would have
quantityIncluded=12, quantityUomId=oz, > >>>
>> >>>> > >>> piecesIncluded=6.
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>> -David
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>>> Hi Scott, this is sure an interesting idea, but then how does
the system
>> >>>> > >>>> know that they are for example 10 pieces in a box? I still what
to have
>> >>>> > >>>> the same inventory for boxes and pieces.
>> >>>> > >>>> We should be able to store the conversion between the uom's for
this
>> >>>> > >>>> product somewhere?
>> >>>> > >>>>
>> >>>> > >>>> Thanks for you input!
>> >>>> > >>>>
>> >>>> > >>>> Regards,
>> >>>> > >>>> Hans
>> >>>> > >>>>
>> >>>> > >>>> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 17:39 +1300, Scott Gray wrote:
>> >>>> > >>>>> Hi Hans,
>> >>>> > >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>> Sorry if this is a silly question, but why not just use different
products for different UOMs? You could use >
>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>> virtual/variants if you wanted the UOM to be selectable on a
single product page and also marketing packages to >
>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>> automatically produce inventory for the desired UOM from the
base UOM.
>> >>>> > >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>> Regards
>> >>>> > >>>>> Scott
>> >>>> > >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>> HotWax Media
>> >>>> > >>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>> >>>> > >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>> On 3/10/2010, at 3:54 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> >>>> > >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>> Thank you BJ,
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>> I had in mind to create and 'productUomAlternatives' table to
the
>> >>>> > >>>>>> product with a conversion for example from pieces to boxes
with an
>> >>>> > >>>>>> optional price adjustment percentage.
>> >>>> > >>>>>> The system will have however only one uom where everything gets
>> >>>> > >>>>>> converted to.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>> Anybody else other solutions?
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>> > >>>>>> Hans.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 10:21 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> Yes also like a Feed store will have boxes, Sacks, and loose
feed.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> I used the multiple pricing model for the Uom Measure
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> in the product screen made it allow multiple UOM.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> added to the code that converts from what is received in
inventory to
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> what is sold so it walks through the Uom. for instance a feed
store
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> Receives feed in Bulk and then sacks it as inventory is
required.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> The Inventory levels have to be checked to see how many in a
product
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> run to generate to sack up the grain. This Triggers an Seca.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> I think a nice touch would be that the could generates the
product data
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> to show up in orders, based on the Uoms that were generated
for the
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> products. it would follow the same model for inventory levels
on the
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> orderentry and Ecommerce
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>> Hans Bakker sent the following on 10/2/2010 4:29 AM:
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> A question to the community:
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> sometimes the same products are sold with different units of
measure.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Example gold jewelry.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Per piece, per box of 10, per box of 50 and per gram gold
weight.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Is here a preference how to implement that?
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Remember this has to show up in e-commerce, orders,
shipments and
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> invoices...
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Hans
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
>> >>>> > >>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
>> >>>> > >>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>> >>>> > >>>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>>
>> >>>> > >>>>
>> >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
>> >>>> > >>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
>> >>>> > >>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>> >>>> > >>>>
>> >>>> > >>>
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > -- > > Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
>> >>>> > > Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
>> >>>> > > Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
>> >>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
>> >>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
> --
> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>
