[jira] [Updated] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre Smits updated OFBIZ-12405: - Description: Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz. Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications. The additional benefit for developers is that with the implemented change the tech come closer to the language of the user was: Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz. Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications. > Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments > -- > > Key: OFBIZ-12405 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: accounting >Affects Versions: Trunk >Reporter: Pierre Smits >Assignee: Pierre Smits >Priority: Major > Labels: invoice, usability > > Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz. > Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item > Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications. > The additional benefit for developers is that with the implemented change the > tech come closer to the language of the user -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] sonarcloud[bot] commented on pull request #355: Implemented: getEnvironmentProperty to allow environment variable configuration (OFBIZ-9498)
sonarcloud[bot] commented on pull request #355: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/355#issuecomment-980060773 Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!  [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=BUG) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=BUG) [0 Bugs](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=BUG) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=VULNERABILITY) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=VULNERABILITY) [0 Vulnerabilities](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=VULNERABILITY) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [0 Security Hotspots](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=CODE_SMELL) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=CODE_SMELL) [0 Code Smells](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=CODE_SMELL) [](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355) No Coverage information [](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=new_duplicated_lines_density=list) [0.2% Duplication](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=new_duplicated_lines_density=list) -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] sonarcloud[bot] removed a comment on pull request #355: Implemented: getEnvironmentProperty to allow environment variable configuration (OFBIZ-9498)
sonarcloud[bot] removed a comment on pull request #355: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/355#issuecomment-979022668 Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!  [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=BUG) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=BUG) [0 Bugs](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=BUG) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=VULNERABILITY) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=VULNERABILITY) [0 Vulnerabilities](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=VULNERABILITY) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [0 Security Hotspots](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=CODE_SMELL) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=CODE_SMELL) [0 Code Smells](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=false=CODE_SMELL) [](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355) No Coverage information [](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=new_duplicated_lines_density=list) [0.2% Duplication](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=355=new_duplicated_lines_density=list) -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449597#comment-17449597
]
Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-12405:
--
Merci Jacques,
{noformat}
OK, it seems we have some time to spent on this.{noformat}
Indeed it seems like that. And you appear to be glad about spending time to
prove me wrong, trivialise the issue etc. (especially when you later in your
comment: when there are much more important ones waiting...)
I respect you so much that I cannot pass the opportunity to clarify stuff
related to what your brought forward.
Please look back from where this came: linked ticket OFBIZ-12384 and PR 344. My
apologies that the description of this ticket doesn't match expectations.
{noformat}
A famous author asked this question: "What's in a name?". His answer was that
it's irrelevant* and I more than agree with that**.{noformat}
Indeed irrelevant. Both the question, and the statement.
{noformat}
What end users will see, and is important, is the translation in their
languages. We should not confuse syntax (name) and semantic (content).{noformat}
In this case, for the replacing label will eliminate confusion: syntax (name)
and semantic (content) will be in sync: CommonPayments (name/syntax) and for
English the translation (semantics) 'Payments', for French 'Payements', for
German 'Zahlungen', for Dutch 'Betalingen'. Not only confusion elimination for
users, but also for contributors.
{noformat}
*What I mean is end users will never see the name of the label
(AccountingApplications). Only developpers will see it and that does not count
much. {noformat}
Thank you that you believe that what counts for (is important to) any other
contributor is something that you feel can/must define.
{noformat}
This menu-item does not show when an invoice has been paid (ie all payments are
applied to the invoice). It shows when no payments are applied to the
invoice.{noformat}
Again consider where this came from (originating ticket and PR). With current
demo data no, (eliminating that gap is another ticket, I guess). It will show
(to both users with VIEW Permissions' and with more permissions, like
CREATE/UPDATE):
# multiple partial payments of the invoice (if paid in portions) or
# single payment (in full) of the invoice with the date when the payment was
made.
You can test drive this yourself in
[https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org/accounting/control/editInvoiceApplications?invoiceId=demo10001]
(as a user with CREATE/UPDATE privileges) by selecting payment 8000 and
associate it with the invoice by clicking the trigger at the end of the line
item. When subsequently logging in as a user with only VIEW permissions, and
accessing the same uri, you will see the payments that pay for this invoice.
{noformat}
a screen which title is: "Assign Payment to This Invoice".{noformat}
I did a search/find action on the trunk branch. Could not find any screen
definition that has a label which has that English translation. It seems the
label for this translation (AccountingAssignPaymentToInvoice) is not used in
any menu-item, or other trigger in any screen definition in InvoiceScreens.xml.
Not even in a screen definition in PaymentScreens.xml. (removal from the code
base should be address in another ticket).
{noformat}
a screen which title is: "Possible payments to apply [payer] sent from
[recipient]" (combination of AccountingListPaymentsNotYetApplied and
AccountingPaymentSentForm labels){noformat}
Ahh. the sub screen in EditInvoiceApplications screen definition in
InvoiceScreens.xml. Again, consider where this ticket is coming from. This sub
section is not intended for users with only VIEW privileges.
{noformat}
For AccountingApplicationSuccess, we need 1st to agree (or definitely not)
about what to do about AccountingApplications before speaking again about
that...Don't expect more comments on this from me...{noformat}
Same here. Unless... you or any other contributor believes it becomes relevant
(again) to this ticket at a later date/time. Who knows what happens then. :)
{noformat}
* "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet."
** For the fun: my name is "Le Roux", it means "The Redhead", but my hairs are
black. Not only names (syntax) can be irrelevant but sometimes wrong. That's
not a problem, what's count is their content (semantic), here me {noformat}
Yeah... What to say about that... I like the attempt to be funny, inclusive and
considerate and such, so... thank you!
Remember what I said recently about breaking up OFBIZ-12384 and PR 344: before
long a(other) contributor will come along and will start to project that any
and all new ticket(s) (related to the original ticket and PR, as you desired in
comments in that ticket and elsewhere) is trivial and insignificant? Remember
that?
> Rename invoiceApplications menu-item
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449569#comment-17449569 ] Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-12405: - Editing with visual mode in Jira is a plague! > Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments > -- > > Key: OFBIZ-12405 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: accounting >Affects Versions: Trunk >Reporter: Pierre Smits >Assignee: Pierre Smits >Priority: Major > Labels: invoice, usability > > Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz. > Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item > Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449567#comment-17449567
]
Jacques Le Roux edited comment on OFBIZ-12405 at 11/26/21, 1:21 PM:
OK, it seems we have some time to spent on this.
A famous author asked this question: "What's in a name?". His answer was that
it's irrelevant* and I more than agree with that**.
What I mean is end users will never see the name of the label
(AccountingApplications). Only developpers will see it and that does not count
much. What end users will see, and is important, is the translation in their
languages. We should not confuse syntax (name) and semantic (content).
Now about the content, AccountingApplications is used in 3 places:
# menu-item name="editInvoiceApplications"
# Two containers in screen name="EditPayment" with respectively conditions:
vs
First let's analyze #1. You say
{quote}These translations would be more appropriate for a trigger (button,
menu-item in an menu for action to be performed) and thus for a specific label
(if not already present, I did not check), not for a menu-item intended to show
an overview of payments associated to an invoice.
{quote}
That's simply wrong. This menu-item does not show when an invoice has been paid
(ie all payments are applied to the invoice). It shows when no payments are
applied to the invoice. Depending on the status of the invoice (at least
Approved or In-Process) it respectively leads to
# a screen which title is: "Assign Payment to This Invoice". So "Payment
application" is appropriate there.-
# a screen which title is: "Possible payments to apply [payer] sent from
[recipient]" (combination of AccountingListPaymentsNotYetApplied and
AccountingPaymentSentForm labels) So "Payment application" is also appropriate
there.-
In both cases the mention "No applications found.." is shown
I let you analyse #2 and possibly #1 more. It seems to me we are going a bit
too deep for such a trivial issue, when there are much more important ones
waiting...
For AccountingApplicationSuccess, we need 1st to agree (or definitely not)
about what to do about AccountingApplications before speaking again about
that...
Don't expect more comments on this from me...
\* "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet."
\** For the fun: my name is "Le Roux", it means "The Redhead", but my hairs are
black. Not only names (syntax) can be irrelevant but sometimes wrong. That's
not a problem, what's count is their content (semantic), here me :)
was (Author: jacques.le.roux):
OK, it seems we have some time to spent on this.
A famous author asked this question: "What's in a name?". His answer was that
it's irrelevant* and I more than agree with that**.
What I mean is end users will never see the name of the label
(AccountingApplications). Only developpers will see it and that does not count
much. What end users will see, and is important, is the translation in their
languages. We should not confuse syntax (name) and semantic (content).
Now about the content, AccountingApplications is used in 3 places:
# menu-item name="editInvoiceApplications"
# Two containers in screen name="EditPayment" with respectively conditions:
vs
First let's analyze #1. You say
{quote}These translations would be more appropriate for a trigger (button,
menu-item in an menu for action to be performed) and thus for a specific label
(if not already present, I did not check), not for a menu-item intended to show
an overview of payments associated to an invoice.
{quote}
That's simply wrong. This menu-item does not show when an invoice has been paid
(ie all payments are applied to the invoice). It shows when no payments are
applied to the invoice. Depending on the status of the invoice (at least
Approved or In-Process) it respectively leads to
# a screen which title is: "Assign Payment to This Invoice". So "Payment
application" is appropriate there.-
# a screen which title is: "Possible payments to apply [payer] sent from
[recipient]" (combination of AccountingListPaymentsNotYetApplied and
AccountingPaymentSentForm labels) So "Payment application" is also appropriate
there.-
In both cases the mention "No applications found.." is shown
I let you analyse #2 and possibly #1 more. It seems to me we are going a bit
too deep for such a trivial issue, when there are much more important ones
waiting...
For AccountingApplicationSuccess, we need 1st to agree (or definitely not)
about what to do about AccountingApplications before speaking again about
that...
Don't expect more comments on this from me...
* "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet."
** For the fun: my name is "Le Roux", it means "The Redhead", but my hairs are
black. Not only names (syntax) can be irrelevant but sometimes wrong. That's
not a problem,
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449567#comment-17449567
]
Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-12405:
-
OK, it seems we have some time to spent on this.
A famous author asked this question: "What's in a name?". His answer was that
it's irrelevant* and I more than agree with that**.
What I mean is end users will never see the name of the label
(AccountingApplications). Only developpers will see it and that does not count
much. What end users will see, and is important, is the translation in their
languages. We should not confuse syntax (name) and semantic (content).
Now about the content, AccountingApplications is used in 3 places:
# menu-item name="editInvoiceApplications"
# Two containers in screen name="EditPayment" with respectively conditions:
vs
First let's analyze #1. You say
{quote}These translations would be more appropriate for a trigger (button,
menu-item in an menu for action to be performed) and thus for a specific label
(if not already present, I did not check), not for a menu-item intended to show
an overview of payments associated to an invoice.
{quote}
That's simply wrong. This menu-item does not show when an invoice has been paid
(ie all payments are applied to the invoice). It shows when no payments are
applied to the invoice. Depending on the status of the invoice (at least
Approved or In-Process) it respectively leads to
# a screen which title is: "Assign Payment to This Invoice". So "Payment
application" is appropriate there.-
# a screen which title is: "Possible payments to apply [payer] sent from
[recipient]" (combination of AccountingListPaymentsNotYetApplied and
AccountingPaymentSentForm labels) So "Payment application" is also appropriate
there.-
In both cases the mention "No applications found.." is shown
I let you analyse #2 and possibly #1 more. It seems to me we are going a bit
too deep for such a trivial issue, when there are much more important ones
waiting...
For AccountingApplicationSuccess, we need 1st to agree (or definitely not)
about what to do about AccountingApplications before speaking again about
that...
Don't expect more comments on this from me...
* "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet."
** For the fun: my name is "Le Roux", it means "The Redhead", but my hairs are
black. Not only names (syntax) can be irrelevant but sometimes wrong. That's
not a problem, what's count is their content (semantic), here me :)
> Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
> --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-12405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: accounting
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Pierre Smits
>Priority: Major
> Labels: invoice, usability
>
> Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz.
> Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item
> Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12407) Downloadable costing PDF
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12407?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449542#comment-17449542 ] Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-12407: -- Hi [~aishwary], Please consider updating the version(s) affected, as it will help other contributors in search/find activities when looking for issues related to specific versions and branches. I agree with you: the cost of something is a key elements in the business decision process to have that something done or not. In the description you say:'can be a nice improvement'. For sure it can be. Therefore, I would say it is appropriate that you rated it as 'Minor' Nice for whom? Isn't that subjective? Would it not deserve more than just bing a 'nice to have'? Given that you started with 'Costing is an integral part for decision making' would this ticket not deserve to be higher up the MoSCoW scale? Before starting with having a function to generate a pdf, it seems to me that there is some detail missing: * What kind of cost(ing) would you like to be visible (and have a pdf to be generated from)? Calculated (estimated) cost of a task template? Of a Schema? Actual cost of a task in a production run? Actual cost of the Projection run? Actual vs Estimated cost of a production run? * What level of detail would you consider to be a necessity for insight into the costing? Just total cost? For the production run, or down to total cost per task, or even further: to the granular level of equipment used and workers assigned? * The previous indicates the user of the PDF: is it intended for the production run manager, the manufacturing manager, or even higher up in hierarchy? In short, what can a (potential) user, and other contributors evaluating this ticket and an eventual PR, expect to get? > Downloadable costing PDF > > > Key: OFBIZ-12407 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12407 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: manufacturing >Reporter: Aishwary Shrivastava >Priority: Minor > > Costing is integral part for decision making. > Many businesses will be benefited if they can generate a PDF for the costing > to make vital decisions and also to compare different costings. > A support for downloadable PDF for costing can be a nice improvement -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-11236) Add shipment notes
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-11236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449530#comment-17449530 ] Gaudin Pierre commented on OFBIZ-11236: --- Thank you Devanshu and jacques for your pugnacity... Like many of us, I don't have enough time to get back into this ticket at the moment. If you are interested in continuing Devanshu, I thank you very much in advance. (y) > Add shipment notes > -- > > Key: OFBIZ-11236 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-11236 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: product >Affects Versions: Trunk >Reporter: Gaudin Pierre >Priority: Minor > Labels: shipment > Attachments: OFBIZ-11236_shipmentNotesV3.patch, Screen Shot > 2020-02-11 at 08.53.37.png > > > Hello, > For many entities there are associated notes. However, there are no notes > associated with shipments. > The purpose of this patch is therefore to add notes to the shipments. > A new tab called "note" appears when displaying a shipment. From this tab it > is possible to add a note. From the shipment overview a section displays the > notes associated with the shipment. > For this new feature a "ShipmentNote" entity has been added. In the same way, > all the services allowing the management of notes have been associated. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] PierreSmits edited a comment on pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
PierreSmits edited a comment on pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356#issuecomment-979853781 Jacques, Please consider that this may trigger someone to cry wolf again, as we have seen in recent days. Let it go. For harmony (and happy collaborating) sake. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] PierreSmits commented on pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
PierreSmits commented on pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356#issuecomment-979853781 Jacques, Please consider that this may trigger someone to cry wolf again, as we have seen in recent days. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449498#comment-17449498
]
Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-12405:
--
Bonjour Jacques,
{quote}_Je n'ai aucun problème avec le pinaillage, quand ça enlève la confusion.
{quote}
It is all about context, like you try to explain in your referenced example. An
application of something to something else, is good when you don't have a
contextual reference. But when you are talking within the context of a
particular domain, you try to minimise confusion to the max.
Let me try to explain this with following example:
When you ask a painter who is *painting* the facade of your house what he is
doing, he will say: I put *paint* on your facade (he might even say: I apply
*paint* to your facade). But when you ask him what is on the facade, he will
say: 'there is *paint* on the facade', not 'There is an application on the
facade'. But someone not familiar with the context of painting, and not know
the the word for Paint, may say that there is an application on the facade.
Like he could say, when there is an ornament nailed to the facade, that there
is an application nailed to the facade.
With this it is the same: when looking at the invoice in
[https://localhost:8443/accounting/control/invoiceOverview?invoiceId=demo10001,]
you get (immediately) what's associated with the invoice (or applied to):
* items
* time entries
* roles
* terms
But not {*}payments{*}.
Probably because someone thought that the verb should be more important than
the subject the verb was referencing.
Re: I propose rather to change the label to "Payment application" in English and (eg)
"Enregistrer un paiement" in French.
You're not talking about changing the label, but rather the translations
associated with the label.
IMO, this is creates confusion. the label 'AccountingApplication' can either be
seen as consisting of a noun and a verb (as in applying accounting) or as
consisting of 2 nouns (Accounting and Application).
In the latter, the first noun provides the leading context (domain =
accounting), and the second the specifics (Application). But it is missing
something: application of {*}what{*}?
Your suggested translation makes it about description of the activity
(Enregistrer, in french), as the proposed change for the English translation
would do also.
These translations would be more appropriate for a trigger (button, menu-item
in an menu for action to be performed) and thus for a specific label (if not
already present, I did not check), not for a menu-item intended to show an
overview of *payments* associated to an invoice.
re: You may also want to check AccountingApplicationSuccess. There I propose
inFrench: "Enregistrer ${amountApplied?currency(${isoCode})} du paiement
[${paymentId}] � ${toMessage}"
Thank you for bringing something that is associated with this to the attention
of the audience Should your proposition not be discussed in dev ml? This
ticket is not about changing what is related. Can you live with seeing that
addressed up in another ticket? Or do you want it addressed in this ticket
(please consider that this may trigger someone to cry wolf again, as we have
seen in recent days)? .
> Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
> --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-12405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: accounting
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Pierre Smits
>Priority: Major
> Labels: invoice, usability
>
> Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz.
> Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item
> Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449475#comment-17449475
]
Jacques Le Roux edited comment on OFBIZ-12405 at 11/26/21, 9:23 AM:
Hi Pierre,
I don't know much about the terms used in English accounting. If I refer to
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-a-payment-application-invoice-and-Running-Accounts-Bill-in-construction-industry
I'm not sure we should change that this way. Quoting it:
bq. Payment application is when a received payment is applied to an account
balance.
For me, the payment alone is the action of a person sending some money to sold
out an invoice. Which is different from applying a received payment to an
account balance (aka an invoice for me).
So, since we are in nitpicking and I have all the time for that, I propose
rather to change the label to "Payment
application" in English and (eg) "Enregistrer un paiement" in French.
You may also want to check AccountingApplicationSuccess. There I propose
inFrench: "Enregistrer ${amountApplied?currency(${isoCode})} du paiement
[${paymentId}] � ${toMessage}"
HTH
was (Author: jacques.le.roux):
Hi Pierre,
I don't know much about the terms used in English accounting. If I refer to
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-a-payment-application-invoice-and-Running-Accounts-Bill-in-construction-industry
I'm not sure we should change that this way. Quoting it:
bq. Payment application is when a received payment is applied to an account
balance.
For mee, the payment alone is the action of a person sending some money to sold
out an invoice. Which is different from applying a received payment to an
account balance (aka an invoice for me).
So, since we are in nitpicking and I have all the time for that, I propose
rather to change the label to "Payment
application" in English and (eg) "Enregistrer un paiement" in French.
You may also want to check AccountingApplicationSuccess. There I propose
inFrench: "Enregistrer ${amountApplied?currency(${isoCode})} du paiement
[${paymentId}] � ${toMessage}"
HTH
> Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
> --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-12405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: accounting
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Pierre Smits
>Priority: Major
> Labels: invoice, usability
>
> Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz.
> Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item
> Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OFBIZ-10883) Picklist is in Input status even after order is completed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449412#comment-17449412 ] Jacques Le Roux edited comment on OFBIZ-10883 at 11/26/21, 9:16 AM: Hi [~shikha.jaiswal], [~surajk], I had a new look and I think this patch should do it [^OFBIZ-10883.diff]. Do you agree? W/o confirmation I'll commit in a week... was (Author: jacques.le.roux): Hi [~shikha.jaiswal], [~surajk], I had a new look and I think this patch should do it [^OFBIZ-10883.diff]. Do you agree, w/o confirmation I'll commit in a week... > Picklist is in Input status even after order is completed > - > > Key: OFBIZ-10883 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10883 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Bug > Components: product >Affects Versions: Release Branch 16.11, Release Branch 18.12, Release > Branch 17.12, Trunk >Reporter: Rashi Dhagat >Assignee: Suraj Khurana >Priority: Major > Fix For: 17.12.01, 18.12.01 > > Attachments: OFBIZ-10883-new.patch, OFBIZ-10883.diff, > OFBIZ-10883.patch, OrderStatus.jpg, PicklistStatus.jpg > > > Steps to regenerate: > 1. Open https://demo-stable.ofbiz.apache.org/ordermgr/control/main > 2. Create order > 3. Open > https://demo-stable.ofbiz.apache.org/facility/control/PicklistOptions?facilityId=WebStoreWarehouse > 4. Create Picking > 5. Click on Packing under the facility > 6. Enter order id and click on pack order > 7. Enter package detail and complete packaging > 8. Open > https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org/facility/control/PicklistManage?facilityId=WebStoreWarehouse > Actual: Picklist is in the input status > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] JacquesLeRoux edited a comment on pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
JacquesLeRoux edited a comment on pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356#issuecomment-979798722 Right, but it would not have hurt to have it here too :unamused: -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] JacquesLeRoux commented on pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
JacquesLeRoux commented on pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356#issuecomment-979798722 Right! -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12405) Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449475#comment-17449475
]
Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-12405:
-
Hi Pierre,
I don't know much about the terms used in English accounting. If I refer to
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-a-payment-application-invoice-and-Running-Accounts-Bill-in-construction-industry
I'm not sure we should change that this way. Quoting it:
bq. Payment application is when a received payment is applied to an account
balance.
For mee, the payment alone is the action of a person sending some money to sold
out an invoice. Which is different from applying a received payment to an
account balance (aka an invoice for me).
So, since we are in nitpicking and I have all the time for that, I propose
rather to change the label to "Payment
application" in English and (eg) "Enregistrer un paiement" in French.
You may also want to check AccountingApplicationSuccess. There I propose
inFrench: "Enregistrer ${amountApplied?currency(${isoCode})} du paiement
[${paymentId}] � ${toMessage}"
HTH
> Rename invoiceApplications menu-item label to Payments
> --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-12405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12405
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: accounting
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Pierre Smits
>Priority: Major
> Labels: invoice, usability
>
> Application(s) is generic (also used within contexts elsewhere) in OFBiz.
> Users have a better perception of context when looking at a menu-item
> Payments in the screen of an invoice, than seeing Applications.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] sonarcloud[bot] commented on pull request #358: Improved: removal triggers screen present as menu-items (OFBIZ-12406)
sonarcloud[bot] commented on pull request #358: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/358#issuecomment-979782414 Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!  [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=BUG) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=BUG) [0 Bugs](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=BUG) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=VULNERABILITY) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=VULNERABILITY) [0 Vulnerabilities](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=VULNERABILITY) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [0 Security Hotspots](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=CODE_SMELL) [](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=CODE_SMELL) [0 Code Smells](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=false=CODE_SMELL) [](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358) No Coverage information [](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_ofbiz-framework=358=duplicated_lines_density=list) No Duplication information -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12399) Upgrade OFBiz to use Java JDK Version 17
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12399?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449463#comment-17449463 ] Ioan Eugen Stan commented on OFBIZ-12399: - We might need to upgrade to groovy 3.0.8 [https://github.com/gradle/gradle/issues/16857] > Upgrade OFBiz to use Java JDK Version 17 > > > Key: OFBIZ-12399 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12399 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Ioan Eugen Stan >Priority: Major > > We should have ofbiz owrking with JDK17. > This issue should track progress on making that happen. > One think we need to do is upgrade gradle to 7.3 . -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] PierreSmits opened a new pull request #358: Improved: removal triggers screen present as menu-items (OFBIZ-12406)
PierreSmits opened a new pull request #358: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/358 Currently, a user with only 'VIEW' permissions, as demonstrated in trunk demo with userId = auditor, accessing the InvoiceOverviews screen sees triggers (intended for users with 'CREATE' or 'UPDATE' permissions). Such triggers are already available via menu-items associated the screen. modified: InvoiceOverview screen in InvoiceScreens.xml -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Assigned] (OFBIZ-12406) remove trigger links in InvoiceOverview already present in menu-items
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12406?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre Smits reassigned OFBIZ-12406: Assignee: Pierre Smits > remove trigger links in InvoiceOverview already present in menu-items > - > > Key: OFBIZ-12406 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12406 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: accounting >Affects Versions: Trunk >Reporter: Pierre Smits >Assignee: Pierre Smits >Priority: Major > Labels: cleanup, invoice, usability > > Currently, a user with only 'VIEW' permissions, as demonstrated in trunk demo > with userId = auditor, accessing the InvoiceOverviews screens sees triggers > (intended for users with 'CREATE' or 'UPDATE' permissions). > Such triggers are already available via menu-items associated the screen. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OFBIZ-12400) Upgrade to gradle 7.3
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449447#comment-17449447
]
Ioan Eugen Stan edited comment on OFBIZ-12400 at 11/26/21, 8:15 AM:
IMO there is no reason to wait.
Gradle 7.3 still works with Java 11. and Java 8 see
[https://docs.gradle.org/current/userguide/compatibility.html]
{noformat}
A Java version between 8 and 17 is required to execute Gradle. Java 18 and
later versions are not yet supported.{noformat}
Upgrading now should not break anything.
was (Author: ieugen):
IMO there is no reason to wait.
Gradle 7.3 still works with Java 11. and Java 8
Upgrading now should not break anything.
> Upgrade to gradle 7.3
> --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-12400
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Sub-task
>Reporter: Ioan Eugen Stan
>Assignee: Ioan Eugen Stan
>Priority: Major
>
> For working with Java 17, we need to upgrade to gradle 7.3
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OFBIZ-12400) Upgrade to gradle 7.3
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449447#comment-17449447 ] Ioan Eugen Stan edited comment on OFBIZ-12400 at 11/26/21, 8:12 AM: IMO there is no reason to wait. Gradle 7.3 still works with Java 11. and Java 8 Upgrading now should not break anything. was (Author: ieugen): IMO there is no reason to wait. Gradle 7.3 still works with Java 11. Upgrading now should not break anything. > Upgrade to gradle 7.3 > -- > > Key: OFBIZ-12400 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Ioan Eugen Stan >Assignee: Ioan Eugen Stan >Priority: Major > > For working with Java 17, we need to upgrade to gradle 7.3 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] PierreSmits commented on pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
PierreSmits commented on pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356#issuecomment-979771265 Thanks Jacques, for your constructive comment. Context is addressed in the ticket, which will be seen by existing and potential adopters when the release notes are generated for a new release. Context provided in the commit is not referenced there. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12400) Upgrade to gradle 7.3
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449447#comment-17449447 ] Ioan Eugen Stan commented on OFBIZ-12400: - IMO there is no reason to wait. Gradle 7.3 still works with Java 11. Upgrading now should not break anything. > Upgrade to gradle 7.3 > -- > > Key: OFBIZ-12400 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Ioan Eugen Stan >Assignee: Ioan Eugen Stan >Priority: Major > > For working with Java 17, we need to upgrade to gradle 7.3 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Closed] (OFBIZ-12404) Removing redundant property-maps for labels reference in InvoiceOverview
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre Smits closed OFBIZ-12404. Fix Version/s: Upcoming Branch Resolution: Implemented Thanks to Jacques for his assistance to get the improvement merged into the codebase of the project > Removing redundant property-maps for labels reference in InvoiceOverview > > > Key: OFBIZ-12404 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12404 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: accounting >Affects Versions: Trunk >Reporter: Pierre Smits >Assignee: Pierre Smits >Priority: Major > Labels: cleanup, invoice > Fix For: Upcoming Branch > > > Property maps for labels exist in screen InvoiceOverview that also exist in > related (and referenced common screen(s). -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] JacquesLeRoux commented on pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
JacquesLeRoux commented on pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356#issuecomment-979766100 Hi Pierre, Even if it obvious for you (once done), it would have been great if you had added that these lines duplicated those in main-decorator (I guess) -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-12404) Removing redundant property-maps for labels reference in InvoiceOverview
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17449439#comment-17449439 ] ASF subversion and git services commented on OFBIZ-12404: - Commit a58dd360a6c944104490eaa831d08be5f5ff2158 in ofbiz-framework's branch refs/heads/trunk from Pierre Smits [ https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-framework.git;h=a58dd36 ] Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404) (#356) modified: InvoiceScreens.xml removed redundant property-maps for Party and Product labels > Removing redundant property-maps for labels reference in InvoiceOverview > > > Key: OFBIZ-12404 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12404 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: accounting >Affects Versions: Trunk >Reporter: Pierre Smits >Assignee: Pierre Smits >Priority: Major > Labels: cleanup, invoice > > Property maps for labels exist in screen InvoiceOverview that also exist in > related (and referenced common screen(s). -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[GitHub] [ofbiz-framework] JacquesLeRoux merged pull request #356: Improved: redundancy removal (OFBIZ-12404)
JacquesLeRoux merged pull request #356: URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/356 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
