Done in an info block (for the color difference actually)

Jacques
PS : I got the habit of sending such messages. The intention is of course to grab attention and reviews... Without comments I suppose it's ok, thanks!

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[email protected]>
We could put some comments in contributors best practices.

Jacques

From: "David E Jones" <[email protected]>
The problem with Jira is that there is no good way to do threaded  discussions. 
If it is a single and very simple topic, no big
deal...  but as soon as you have multiple questions or comments to respond  
to... how do you do that?

Editing previous comments is an interesting way, but if people do that  they 
MUST put a BIG prefix before their comments so it is
possible to  distinguish them from the original text. That should include more than  just 
a pair of "*" to bold part or all of
the response, and should  also include your initials so that it is clear which 
things you added.  Also, for these sorts of things
we should be sure to add and not edit  wherever possible.

Anyway, if there is a better way to handle threaded discussions and  keep 
things in context that would be GREAT as this is pretty
kludgy.

-David


On May 1, 2009, at 12:22 AM, Scott Gray wrote:

Yeah I guess at the end of the day it doesn't really bother me, I  just like to 
let people know that if you edit your comment
and I've  already read the original, well I won't be reading it a second  time 
:-)  My guess is that a lot of other people don't
bother  reading edits either.

Regards
Scott

HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

On 1/05/2009, at 6:17 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

I personnaly prefer that we keep it (anyway this would be a Jira  demand to 
infra) because sometimes it's useful. But totally
agree  that we should use this feature parsimoniously
The problem with this kind of non authoritative approach is that  you have to 
explain over and over. On the other hand, this is
what  we call education...

Jacques

From: "Scott Gray" <[email protected]>
Hi Divesh (and anybody else who does this regularly)

Wherever possible please avoid editing comments (I almost wish we   could turn 
it off), most of us read jira issues through
email  notifications and it is impossible to know what you've changed in  your  
comment.

Thanks
Scott

HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

On 1/05/2009, at 4:36 PM, Divesh Dutta (JIRA) wrote:


 [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2388?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12704689
#action_12704689 ]

Divesh Dutta edited comment on OFBIZ-2388 at 4/30/09 9:35 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------

Hello David,

Please see my comments inline :

The way this is implemented will not scale adequately for   deployments with 
large numbers of orders.

In the ReviewOrdersNotPickedOrPacked.groovy file the first line  of  code gets 
ALL OrderHeader records from the database, ie:

orderHeaders = delegator.findList("OrderHeader", null, null,  null,  null, 
false);

This is not acceptable as there could be hundreds of thousands  of  millions of 
orders in the database, and so this line will
fail.

*Very true. Here we can add condition. Below is the code  snippet.  Please 
suggest.*
{quote}condList.add(EntityCondition.makeCondition("statusId",   EntityOperator.EQUALS, 
"ORDER_APPROVED"));
condList.add(EntityCondition.makeCondition("orderTypeId",   EntityOperator.EQUALS, 
"SALES_ORDER"));
condList .add(EntityCondition.makeCondition("pickSheetPrintedDate",   
EntityOperator.NOT_EQUAL, null));
cond = EntityCondition.makeCondition(condList, EntityOperator.AND);
orderHeaderList = delegator.findList("OrderHeader", cond, null,   null, null, 
false);{quote}

Later on down in the file the code looks for Shipment records  with a  
primaryOrderId that matches the orderId on each
OrderHeader, and  then looks at other things on the Shipment  record(s) 
corresponding.

All of this can, and should, be done with a view entity. In fact,  it  must be 
done with a view entity so that the work is
done in a  query  in the database and not in a script on the app server  which 
is  hugely inefficient, so much so that in
even moderately  large systems  it simply WILL NOT WORK!

*Agreed*

An addition note: looking for shipments by matching the   OrderHeader.orderId 
with the Shipment.primaryOrderId is not
adequate. Please change it to match the OrderHeader.orderId with  the  
ItemIssuance.orderId and then ItemIssuance.shipmentId
with  Shipment.shipmentId. Not that there will be many records for a   single 
OrderHeader and Shipment combination since the
ItemIssuance  really ties a OrderItem to a ShipmentItem, but that  is fine 
since in  this case all we care about is the
OrderHeader  to Shipment  relationship. Why do we need this? Because it is  
possible for a  single Shipment to have items
from different  orders on it, and  simply looking at the 
Shipment.primaryOrderId  won't capture that...  that field is only
the PRIMARY orderId.

*But here the confusion is , Entries in ItemIssuance Entity is  not  done when we do 
"Verify Pick" (only done when shipment
is  created   in Packed status). So Entries are not present in  ItemIssuance 
entity  for Orders which have shipment in
"Input",  "Picked", and "Scheduled"  status. So IMO above given logic will  not 
help . Please let me know  if I am wrong.*

   was (Author: diveshdut):
 Hello David,

Please see my comments inline :

The way this is implemented will not scale adequately for   deployments with 
large numbers of orders.

In the ReviewOrdersNotPickedOrPacked.groovy file the first line  of  code gets 
ALL OrderHeader records from the database, ie:

orderHeaders = delegator.findList("OrderHeader", null, null,  null,  null, 
false);

This is not acceptable as there could be hundreds of thousands  of  millions of 
orders in the database, and so this line will
fail.

*Very true*

Later on down in the file the code looks for Shipment records  with a  
primaryOrderId that matches the orderId on each
OrderHeader, and  then looks at other things on the Shipment  record(s) 
corresponding.

All of this can, and should, be done with a view entity. In fact,  it  must be 
done with a view entity so that the work is
done in a  query  in the database and not in a script on the app server  which 
is  hugely inefficient, so much so that in
even moderately  large systems  it simply WILL NOT WORK!

*Agreed*

An addition note: looking for shipments by matching the   OrderHeader.orderId 
with the Shipment.primaryOrderId is not
adequate. Please change it to match the OrderHeader.orderId with  the  
ItemIssuance.orderId and then ItemIssuance.shipmentId
with  Shipment.shipmentId. Not that there will be many records for a   single 
OrderHeader and Shipment combination since the
ItemIssuance  really ties a OrderItem to a ShipmentItem, but that  is fine 
since in  this case all we care about is the
OrderHeader  to Shipment  relationship. Why do we need this? Because it is  
possible for a  single Shipment to have items
from different  orders on it, and  simply looking at the 
Shipment.primaryOrderId  won't capture that...  that field is only
the PRIMARY orderId.

*But here the confusion is , Entries in ItemIssuance Entity is  not  done when we do 
"Verify Pick" (only done when shipment
is  created   in Packed status). So Entries are not present in  ItemIssuance 
entity  for Orders which have shipment in
"Input",  "Picked", and "Scheduled"  status. So IMO above given logic will  not 
help . Please let me know  if I am wrong.*

Add a page that shows orders with the "pick sheet printed date"  field
---------------------------------------------------------------------

             Key: OFBIZ-2388
             URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2388
         Project: OFBiz
      Issue Type: Sub-task
      Components: product
Affects Versions: SVN trunk
        Reporter: Pranay Pandey
        Assignee: Vikas Mayur
         Fix For: SVN trunk

     Attachments: ofbiz-2388.patch


*  Add page that shows orders with the "pick sheet printed  date"  field set 
that do not have a Shipment associated with
them that is  in the "Input" or "Scheduled" statuses (should be  in Input 
status,  but just in case Scheduled is eventually
used), sorted by the  oldest date first to see the ones that  have gone the 
longest  without being picked and verified.
* Link to new page from the PicklistOptions page.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.










Reply via email to