Many thanks Pierre. On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 10:41 AM Pierre Smits <pierresm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Emad, Groza, all, > > Given that we're nearing the end of month (and start of the new month) and > we'll all be busy with activities related to that, I'll opt for August 29th > and following time slot: > > *Slot / Zone* *GMT* *NLD* *EGY* *ROU* > *Country* > *Netherlands* *Egypt* *Romania* > *Video Conference* 13:00 15:00 16:00 16:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The link for this is: https://calendar.app.google/8WNZAoAH8cor64ov9 > > Please reply to all on this email (as I am currently blocked by the PMC > from contributing to the project) to ensure everyone on this mailing list > can see it. This will allow others who are interested to opt in and > participate as well. > > Met vriendelijke groet, > > Pierre Smits > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/> since > 2008 (without privileges) > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 1:04 PM Emad Radwan <eradwan1...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It looks like Egypt and Romania's time zone is the same - GMT+3 - which >> is good. Thursday and Saturday time slots identified by Groza are fine >> with >> me. >> >> Regards, >> Emad >> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 1:45 PM Groza Danut <grozadanu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Here are my time slots >> > >> > Romania local time: >> > 29 Thu 15:00 to 20:00 >> > 30 Fri available from 17:00 >> > 31 Sat available from 14:00 >> > 01 Sun pretty much all day >> > 03 Tue 07:00 to 11:00 or 15:00 to 18:00 >> > 04-06 available after 17:00 >> > >> > GMT time: >> > 29 Thu 12:00 to 17:00 >> > 30 Fri available from 14:00 >> > 31 Sat available from 11:00 >> > 01 Sun pretty much all day >> > 03 Tue 04:00 to 08:00 or 12:00 to 15:00 >> > 04-06 available after 14:00 >> > >> > Groza Danut >> > >> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, 13:04 Pierre Smits, <pierresm...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > > Please include your country, so we can factor in timezone corrections >> (if >> > > needed). >> > > >> > > Met vriendelijke groet, >> > > >> > > Pierre Smits >> > > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/> >> > since >> > > 2008 (without privileges) >> > > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 >> > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* >> > > >> > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 11:55 AM Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com >> > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> Hi Emad, Groza, all, >> > >> >> > >> If you can provide me with a few date and time slots, I can schedule >> > >> something that might be least inconvenient for all. >> > >> >> > >> Met vriendelijke groet, >> > >> >> > >> Pierre >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:14 AM Groza Danut <grozadanu...@gmail.com >> > >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> Hi Pierre, >> > >>> >> > >>> I would also be interested in this. Do you think the brewery process >> > >>> would >> > >>> also apply to coffee shops, for the process manufacturing of >> coffees? >> > >>> >> > >>> Groza Danut >> > >>> >> > >>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, 11:02 Emad Radwan, <eradwan1...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> > That will be great. I'm in, anytime. >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Regards, >> > >>> > Emad >> > >>> > >> > >>> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 9:33 AM Pierre Smits < >> pierresm...@apache.org >> > > >> > >>> > wrote: >> > >>> > >> > >>> > > Hi Emad, All >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > How about scheduling a 30-60 minutes video conference where I >> give >> > a >> > >>> > > walk-through based on my BMS 4 Brewery solution? >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > IMO, that would give the most bang-for-buck for you allowing >> for an >> > >>> > higher >> > >>> > > interaction and addressing questions without having to wait >> going >> > >>> through >> > >>> > > longer cycles. >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > Met vriendelijke groet, >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > Pierre Smits >> > >>> > > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz < >> https://ofbiz.apache.org/ >> > > >> > >>> > since >> > >>> > > 2008 (without privileges) >> > >>> > > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 >> > >>> > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 1:27 PM Emad Radwan < >> eradwan1...@gmail.com >> > > >> > >>> > wrote: >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > >> Hello Pierre, >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> Many thanks. I now understand the difference between WIP as a >> > >>> product >> > >>> > type >> > >>> > >> and as an inventory and accounting concept. I also - correct >> me if >> > >>> I am >> > >>> > >> wrong - understand that in 'ProductionRunDeclaration.groovy ' >> it >> > >>> > requires >> > >>> > >> product type NOT to be WIP in order to 'produce'. However, and >> > as I >> > >>> > >> understand better from data and code, could you kindly share - >> > from >> > >>> your >> > >>> > >> mentioned implementation - those records that explain the >> > >>> relationship >> > >>> > >> between the different production runs? data from ProductAssocs >> and >> > >>> > >> WorkEffortAssocs will give me a clearer understanding. >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> Regards, >> > >>> > >> Emad >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 10:39 AM Pierre Smits < >> > >>> pierresm...@apache.org> >> > >>> > >> wrote: >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> > Hi Emad, all, >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > First, for a better understanding of what a WIP product is >> about >> > >>> have >> > >>> > a >> > >>> > >> > look at: >> > https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/workinprogress.asp >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > A WIP product is in essence a a means to facilitate asset >> value >> > >>> > >> > calculation at the end of a reporting period (month, quarter, >> > >>> year). >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > So, it depends.... Not only on the complexity of the BOM and >> > >>> schema >> > >>> > >> steps, >> > >>> > >> > but also on when the financial/fiscal reporting requirements >> > (like >> > >>> > e.g. >> > >>> > >> > when the reporting year ends). >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > If you have a production schema which has steps that can lead >> > to a >> > >>> > step >> > >>> > >> in >> > >>> > >> > a production run going from one day to the next, it can run >> from >> > >>> one >> > >>> > >> > reporting period to the next (e.g. long duration steps in the >> > >>> brewing >> > >>> > >> > process, where fermentation/maturing can take multiple days, >> or >> > >>> even >> > >>> > >> short >> > >>> > >> > steps happening in evening/night shifts). >> > >>> > >> > In such a case you can use the WIP classification as >> production >> > >>> type. >> > >>> > >> But >> > >>> > >> > I would say this adds additional accounting complexities in >> your >> > >>> > setup, >> > >>> > >> > that need to be investigated and tested. >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > in the first iteration of me implementing OFBiz for >> breweries ( >> > >>> see >> > >>> > >> #1), >> > >>> > >> > I started out with defining a single BOM and associated >> > production >> > >>> > >> schema >> > >>> > >> > to get to the first finished product (beer), but that led to >> a >> > >>> unique >> > >>> > >> > schema for each style/variant of beer. Which made production >> > >>> planning >> > >>> > >> (and >> > >>> > >> > reporting) a nightmare. Breaking up such a production schema >> > (and >> > >>> its >> > >>> > >> BOM) >> > >>> > >> > into multiple (dependent/linked schemas) made life easier wrt >> > >>> using >> > >>> > >> OFBiz >> > >>> > >> > regarding production planning and execution, registration of >> > >>> inventory >> > >>> > >> > movements and resource utilization, and reporting >> (accounting) >> > on >> > >>> > asset >> > >>> > >> > value and costs. >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > #1: >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> > >>> >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Brewing+with+OFBiz+at+a+small+or+medium+sized+brewery >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > I trust the above helps you in finding the optimal solution >> for >> > >>> your >> > >>> > >> > 'unique' business case/scenario. Should you have additional >> > >>> questions >> > >>> > >> > and/or remarks, feel free to reach out. >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > Met vriendelijke groet, >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > Pierre Smits >> > >>> > >> > *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz < >> > >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/> >> > >>> > >> since >> > >>> > >> > 2008 (without privileges) >> > >>> > >> > Proud contributor to the ASF since 2006 >> > >>> > >> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC >> Member* >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > Anyone could have been you, whereas I've always been anyone. >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 10:31 AM Emad Radwan < >> > >>> eradwan1...@gmail.com> >> > >>> > >> > wrote: >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> >> Hello Pierre, >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> Few clarifications, please. First, for the new products that >> > >>> we'll >> > >>> > >> create >> > >>> > >> >> - using your explanation above - is it correct to say that >> > >>> they'll be >> > >>> > >> >> 'intermediate' products with 'WIP' product type? >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> Second, Can we have the the whole process - while having the >> > >>> > >> possibility >> > >>> > >> >> to declare intermediate products - in a single production >> run >> > or >> > >>> it >> > >>> > >> >> requires 'child' production runs? >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> If the process above can fit in one production run, then >> what >> > >>> > >> >> configuration is required to make this happen? >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> Regards, >> > >>> > >> >> Emad >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 2:02 PM Emad Radwan < >> > >>> eradwan1...@gmail.com> >> > >>> > >> >> wrote: >> > >>> > >> >> >> > >>> > >> >>> Hello Pierre, >> > >>> > >> >>> >> > >>> > >> >>> Many thanks for the detailed explanation. I have a number >> of >> > >>> > >> >>> follow-up questions that I'll get back to you on in the >> next >> > few >> > >>> > days >> > >>> > >> as I >> > >>> > >> >>> review the relevant code to make sure I'm asking the right >> > >>> > questions. >> > >>> > >> >>> >> > >>> > >> >>> Regards, >> > >>> > >> >>> Emad >> > >>> > >> >>> >> > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 1:36 PM Pierre Smits < >> > >>> > pierre.sm...@gmail.com> >> > >>> > >> >>> wrote: >> > >>> > >> >>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> Hi Emad, >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> A production run to produce Asprin sounds like a >> > >>> process-oriented >> > >>> > >> >>>> manufacturing method (similar to producing 'scrambled >> eggs' >> > you >> > >>> > >> can't unmix >> > >>> > >> >>>> the Asprin mixture). >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> If you have a requirement for 100.000 tablets, I would >> break >> > it >> > >>> > down >> > >>> > >> to >> > >>> > >> >>>> multiple production schemas to keep it simple: 1 for >> > producing >> > >>> the >> > >>> > >> mixture, >> > >>> > >> >>>> 1 for producing the tablets from the mixture, and 1 for >> > >>> packaging >> > >>> > the >> > >>> > >> >>>> tablets. The reason for this is to factoring the waste >> > aspects >> > >>> for >> > >>> > >> the >> > >>> > >> >>>> production runs, but also to have intermediate inventory >> > >>> > >> registration: >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> 1. in the mixture process, residue could remain in the >> > >>> mixing >> > >>> > and >> > >>> > >> >>>> transport equipment leading to 100% (of the weight) of >> > >>> > >> ingredients going in >> > >>> > >> >>>> results in > 100% of output. E.g. 100 kg of >> ingredients > >> > >>> 98 kg >> > >>> > >> of mixture >> > >>> > >> >>>> 2. in the tablet production process, again 100% of the >> > >>> mixture >> > >>> > of >> > >>> > >> 1 >> > >>> > >> >>>> (98 kg) could lead to > 100% of output. >> > >>> > >> >>>> 3. in the packaging process, the tablets registered in >> 2 >> > may >> > >>> > lead >> > >>> > >> >>>> to the last container (box, bag, etc.) not having the >> > >>> correct >> > >>> > >> quantity. >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> Thus process 1 (schema 1) should have a weight step at the >> > end, >> > >>> > which >> > >>> > >> >>>> could account for the actual going into an intermediate >> > >>> inventory >> > >>> > >> product >> > >>> > >> >>>> And process (schema2) should have a 'tablet' counter at >> the >> > >>> end to >> > >>> > >> >>>> determine the 'actual' quantity of produced tablets that >> goes >> > >>> into >> > >>> > >> >>>> inventory. >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> Also, given that you're talking about a food related >> product, >> > >>> > >> batch/lot >> > >>> > >> >>>> registration is essential. Mixing different batches/lots >> from >> > >>> > >> production >> > >>> > >> >>>> run 1 and 2 to get to the required output (100.000 >> tablets) >> > >>> would >> > >>> > >> introduce >> > >>> > >> >>>> unmanageable risks. >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> Now, coming back to your ask about the 'Declare' on a >> task, >> > >>> this >> > >>> > >> would >> > >>> > >> >>>> do something similar within a production run. In a >> production >> > >>> run >> > >>> > >> task you >> > >>> > >> >>>> can 'declare' the output of a task (e.g. the mixture), >> which >> > is >> > >>> > then >> > >>> > >> the >> > >>> > >> >>>> starting point of the next task (but I have found it to be >> > more >> > >>> > >> difficult >> > >>> > >> >>>> to explain regarding waste, by-products and batch/lot >> > >>> registration, >> > >>> > >> when I >> > >>> > >> >>>> introduced OFBiz as a Brewery Management Solution at >> several >> > >>> > >> breweries). >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> I trust the above helps. >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> Met vriendelijke groet, >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> Pierre >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 8:33 PM Emad Radwan < >> > >>> eradwan1...@gmail.com >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Hello Community, >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Assume I have a routing for Asprin - a batch of 100000 >> > >>> tablets - >> > >>> > >> >>>>> manufacturing where there're 7 tasks to make the product. >> > >>> Lets say >> > >>> > >> >>>>> that in >> > >>> > >> >>>>> the first 5 tasks we didn't reach the 'tablet' form yet. >> My >> > >>> > question >> > >>> > >> >>>>> is, >> > >>> > >> >>>>> why the 'Declare' button for one of those tasks is >> > available? >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> By pressing 'declare' we have a form to edit the task >> where >> > >>> some >> > >>> > >> >>>>> fields I >> > >>> > >> >>>>> understand like actual timings but I don't get fields >> like >> > >>> > >> >>>>> QuantityProduced >> > >>> > >> >>>>> for such tasks where we don't have a 'finished product' >> yet. >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Also appear another form - in the - Production Run >> > Declaration >> > >>> > >> section >> > >>> > >> >>>>> - >> > >>> > >> >>>>> that allow to add an inventory item for 'any' product the >> > user >> > >>> > >> selects! >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Do you find it logical to have the above visible for such >> > >>> middle >> > >>> > >> >>>>> tasks? Is >> > >>> > >> >>>>> there a way to configure it to display with tasks that >> will >> > >>> > actually >> > >>> > >> >>>>> deliver the finished product? >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Are the uses cases for this that I'm missing? >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Regards, >> > >>> > >> >>>>> Emad >> > >>> > >> >>>>> >> > >>> > >> >>>> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >