subject:"\[tryton\] Invoice Location"

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-07 Thread Sergi Almacellas Abellana

Hello Carlos,

El 05/12/16 a les 11:15, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto ha escrit:

What I have said is , there is no a way to manage indetifiers on this way:

- a Code
- a Description name

If identifiers has no a way to manage identifiers on this way, then
software doesnt work. just that, simple, since repots need that
codification, reports dont need names, reports need the *Code on Reports*

But is no legal having this:

- Many identifiers per party, this screen was observed. I have fixed it
on the implementartion, but on custom modules, anyway, the software
doesnt fill restrictions.

If you need to fill this requirements, you can add the Peruvian VAT as
custom type on the selection, and then add a new field (requied and only
visible for the peruvian Vat) to indicate the type. This new field can
be a many2one to a new model with code and description.

For the identifier uniqueness, you can add a check on identifier that
checks on creation/modification of an identifer that does not exist
another peruvian_vat for the party and raise and error (or maybe a
warning) if it exists.

Hope it helps.

--
Sergi Almacellas Abellana
www.koolpi.com
Twitter: @pokoli_srk

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/e4867cc9-822b-2f08-f47f-7dd3bf5d0ad2%40koolpi.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

2016-12-05 10:42 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :

> On 2016-12-05 09:53, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > Question: If I have solved this issue, whay I am asking here? well I am
> > building a module that I would like been compatible with tryton comunity
> > guidelines in order on let this module as free and open for the comunity
>
> OK, I will just answer this because others point have already been
> answered.
> No you did not, the Tryton way is using identifier and unicity
> constraint is almost never good. As Fernando pointed there is always
> exceptions. Also it is not a matter of unicity but validity, if you want
> to prevent user from mistakes, you must validate the input so he can not
> invent a wrong number.
>
> --
> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/20161205154213.GR71015%40tetsuo.
>

Ok

Sounds better

About the invoicing, I have noticed something similar, and more complex on
Argentina.

I will been completeing it this end of month and waiting for libertate
these modules firth day of 2017 and get the tryton community approval.

best regards 


-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE8FnPKGSzbF32xWOJnpn9Nb8J%3DKFaukW6z_AsWNu7PMQQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Hi Fernando

According with the "Facturacion Electronica" and "Libros Electronicos" is
yes, is a request, I was two weeks ago with the accountant checking that,
also with a lawyer, and said that. That is the reason.

About having a RUC and DNI, well, for tax Authority are two different people

- With DNI is a common person, and Boleta is just the document required
- With RUC is a company,

Is no legal having both as identifiers. I have checked it with a lawyer

I am trying to make this according the tryton way since I am looking for
make this module free and open, and could be good for all peruavian people
working with tryton on Peru

best reagrds

2016-12-05 9:29 GMT-05:00 Fernando Sánchez :

> Hello carlos
> Is not very correct that in Peru a physical person should have only one
> identifier, I have dni and ruc just like you. And it is also not correct to
> say that only one company can request the receipt with code "01 FACTURA".
> In LiberOrbis we are also working in the Peruvian accounting and fiscal
> location of tryton and we did not have the problem that you indicate. If
> the customer (company or not) has ID code equal to 6 (RUC) tryton
> automatically choose the payment receipt with code "01 FACTURA" otherwise
> "03 BOLETA DE VENTA"
>
> Greetings
>
> Fernando Sanchez
> LiberOrbis
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/007db495-3443-4ebb-a943-827b1c2d5f76%40googlegroups.com.
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE_qk60tuNE7iCwkhwVLyqE4j0JgbQfarF-bjJd1x_%3Dtsw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Cédric Krier

On 2016-12-05 09:53, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> Question: If I have solved this issue, whay I am asking here? well I am
> building a module that I would like been compatible with tryton comunity
> guidelines in order on let this module as free and open for the comunity

OK, I will just answer this because others point have already been
answered.
No you did not, the Tryton way is using identifier and unicity
constraint is almost never good. As Fernando pointed there is always
exceptions. Also it is not a matter of unicity but validity, if you want
to prevent user from mistakes, you must validate the input so he can not
invent a wrong number.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20161205154213.GR71015%40tetsuo.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Sorry for the typewritting mistakes

2016-12-05 5:53 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :

> On 2016-12-05 05:15, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > 2016-12-04 20:39 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :
> >
> > > On 2016-12-04 12:04, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > > > *-- Parties on tryton let to add more than one identifier, that
> makes me
> > > a
> > > > legal issue on a before implementation that I have done, since **tax
> > > > autority said it must not be done on this way because each party must
> > > have
> > > > just one identifier an no more than one.*
> > >
> > > I can not believe you that tax authorities have requirement on how a
> > > software should be designed.
> > >
> >
> > I have never said that!!!
> >
> > What I have said is , there is no a way to manage indetifiers on this
> way:
> >
> > - a Code
> > - a Description name
> >
> > *CODE| Description *
> > ==
> > * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
> > * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
> > * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
> > * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
> > * 7 | PASAPORTE
> > * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
> >
> > If identifiers has no a way to manage identifiers on this way, then
> > software doesnt work. just that, simple, since repots need that
> > codification, reports dont need names, reports need the *Code on Reports*
> >
> > But is no legal having this:
> >
> > - Many identifiers per party, this screen was observed. I have fixed it
> on
> > the implementartion, but on custom modules, anyway, the software doesnt
> > fill restrictions.
>
> So you actually said it and I can not believe it.
>
I understand that functionlity is ok, however doesnt full the full
structure.

- Identifiers on Tryton are just [Type, Name] and let more than one
identifier.
  It looks like a many to many relation ship
- I nned something to [Code, Description] closed list but the
identifiers, yes, a list for it for chose one from the list and no more
than the list, like a one to many relation ship.

Yes, this is a requirement from the tax authority
- Each party must have one, nad no more than one identifier choosen from
the list provided

Requirement from my customers
- Let the admin or the user responsible on register customers to choose
more than one identifier, could make this user get into mistakes, related
to regitration with multiple identifier, they prefer just a simple list to
chose one of the list provided by the tax authority

*CODE| Description *
==
* 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
* 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
* 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
* 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
* 7 | PASAPORTE
* A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD


> >
> > > I can not see how what you describe can be a legal issue. Of course if
> a
> > > party can be assigned only one of those numbers by the authorities,
> > > there are no reason you magically enter more than one.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yes you are right!! but users, if the user makes a mistake, could get
> into
> > a legal issue and get more than USD 1000.00 on penalties for a user
> mistake
> > ( sometimes is no a mistake and the company would like to avoid any kind
> of
> > mistake as possible )
>
> Just like any mistakes a user can do. Software can not correct mistakes.
>

Yes, but It is possible to reduce de probability on make mistakes, at
least on our requirements


>
> > Again, I have soled this issue on custom modules,
>
> I do not understand "soled".
>

I mean, on older customers, I have solved this issue hidden the
identifiers seccion and adding a Selecction Box with the requirements list,
and one more textbox for the number of the identification document.

That solution worked for me and my customers, and filled tax authority
requirements

Question: If I have solved this issue, whay I am asking here? well I am
building a module that I would like been compatible with tryton comunity
guidelines in order on let this module as free and open for the comunity

Best regards


> > hidden identifiers and create a selection field, that runs for me, my
> > customer and tax autgority with mnking issues.
>
> I do not understand "mnking".
>
> > The reason on asking here is, I am designing a trytonic module in order
> on
> > solve this issue on a trytonic way without breaking tryton design or
> rules
> > , or guidelines for make this module free to the comunity.
>
> I can not give any advise because the requirements described are not
> clear nor complete.
>
> --
> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/20161205105336.GO71015%40tetsuo.
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk:

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Fernando Sánchez

Hello carlos
Is not very correct that in Peru a physical person should have only one 
identifier, I have dni and ruc just like you. And it is also not correct to say 
that only one company can request the receipt with code "01 FACTURA". In 
LiberOrbis we are also working in the Peruvian accounting and fiscal location 
of tryton and we did not have the problem that you indicate. If the customer 
(company or not) has ID code equal to 6 (RUC) tryton automatically choose the 
payment receipt with code "01 FACTURA" otherwise "03 BOLETA DE VENTA"

Greetings

Fernando Sanchez
LiberOrbis

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/007db495-3443-4ebb-a943-827b1c2d5f76%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Cédric Krier

On 2016-12-05 05:15, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> Hello
> 
> 2016-12-04 20:39 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :
> 
> > On 2016-12-04 12:04, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > > *-- Parties on tryton let to add more than one identifier, that makes me
> > a
> > > legal issue on a before implementation that I have done, since **tax
> > > autority said it must not be done on this way because each party must
> > have
> > > just one identifier an no more than one.*
> >
> > I can not believe you that tax authorities have requirement on how a
> > software should be designed.
> >
> 
> I have never said that!!!
> 
> What I have said is , there is no a way to manage indetifiers on this way:
> 
> - a Code
> - a Description name
> 
> *CODE| Description *
> ==
> * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
> * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
> * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
> * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
> * 7 | PASAPORTE
> * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
> 
> If identifiers has no a way to manage identifiers on this way, then
> software doesnt work. just that, simple, since repots need that
> codification, reports dont need names, reports need the *Code on Reports*
> 
> But is no legal having this:
> 
> - Many identifiers per party, this screen was observed. I have fixed it on
> the implementartion, but on custom modules, anyway, the software doesnt
> fill restrictions.

So you actually said it and I can not believe it.

> 
> > I can not see how what you describe can be a legal issue. Of course if a
> > party can be assigned only one of those numbers by the authorities,
> > there are no reason you magically enter more than one.
> >
> >
> 
> Yes you are right!! but users, if the user makes a mistake, could get into
> a legal issue and get more than USD 1000.00 on penalties for a user mistake
> ( sometimes is no a mistake and the company would like to avoid any kind of
> mistake as possible )

Just like any mistakes a user can do. Software can not correct mistakes.

> Again, I have soled this issue on custom modules,

I do not understand "soled".

> hidden identifiers and create a selection field, that runs for me, my
> customer and tax autgority with mnking issues.

I do not understand "mnking".

> The reason on asking here is, I am designing a trytonic module in order on
> solve this issue on a trytonic way without breaking tryton design or rules
> , or guidelines for make this module free to the comunity.

I can not give any advise because the requirements described are not
clear nor complete.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20161205105336.GO71015%40tetsuo.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-05 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Hello

2016-12-04 20:39 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :

> On 2016-12-04 12:04, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > *-- Parties on tryton let to add more than one identifier, that makes me
> a
> > legal issue on a before implementation that I have done, since **tax
> > autority said it must not be done on this way because each party must
> have
> > just one identifier an no more than one.*
>
> I can not believe you that tax authorities have requirement on how a
> software should be designed.
>

I have never said that!!!

What I have said is , there is no a way to manage indetifiers on this way:

- a Code
- a Description name

*CODE| Description *
==
* 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
* 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
* 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
* 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
* 7 | PASAPORTE
* A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD

If identifiers has no a way to manage identifiers on this way, then
software doesnt work. just that, simple, since repots need that
codification, reports dont need names, reports need the *Code on Reports*

But is no legal having this:

- Many identifiers per party, this screen was observed. I have fixed it on
the implementartion, but on custom modules, anyway, the software doesnt
fill restrictions.






> I can not see how what you describe can be a legal issue. Of course if a
> party can be assigned only one of those numbers by the authorities,
> there are no reason you magically enter more than one.
>
>

Yes you are right!! but users, if the user makes a mistake, could get into
a legal issue and get more than USD 1000.00 on penalties for a user mistake
( sometimes is no a mistake and the company would like to avoid any kind of
mistake as possible ) Again, I have soled this issue on custom modules,
hidden identifiers and create a selection field, that runs for me, my
customer and tax autgority with mnking issues.

The reason on asking here is, I am designing a trytonic module in order on
solve this issue on a trytonic way without breaking tryton design or rules
, or guidelines for make this module free to the comunity.

After review requirements and some extra local erps and invoicing software,
I have done that ER diagram, since it is accoording to the tax authority

Best regards



> Until this point is not clarify, I will not talk any other topics.
>
> --
> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/20161205013927.GL71015%40tetsuo.
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE9oeFn9aT5TnVtuFFH9f0BzGhN4Tr8G3ZwUhO5TGuTcmQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Cédric Krier

On 2016-12-04 12:04, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> *-- Parties on tryton let to add more than one identifier, that makes me a
> legal issue on a before implementation that I have done, since **tax
> autority said it must not be done on this way because each party must have
> just one identifier an no more than one.*

I can not believe you that tax authorities have requirement on how a
software should be designed.
I can not see how what you describe can be a legal issue. Of course if a
party can be assigned only one of those numbers by the authorities,
there are no reason you magically enter more than one.

Until this point is not clarify, I will not talk any other topics.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20161205013927.GL71015%40tetsuo.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Hello List, Raimon

2016-12-04 12:15 GMT-05:00 Raimon Esteve :

> Hie,
>
> You could custom the invoice report and show/hide more fields. Or add
> labels depends the party (a boolean field, if party has a
> identifier/vat.).
>
> For example, in Spain, a party has'nt a vat (identifier), the report is
> "factura simplificada".
>

Yes, I currently do that, however tax autorithy do a observation on this
way on manage, since identifiers are a many to many relation ship, and
party must have one identifier and no more than that.

Thre is no issue son simple invoice, since is no mandatory the identifier,
but on commercial invoice is mandatory vat , and must be one on a one to
many relationship

Identifiers must be on this sctructure and list


CODE| Description
==
* 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
* 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
* 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
* 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
* 7 | PASAPORTE
* A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD

And invoice types must have this structure and list

 CODE| Description | Document Name | Tryton Name
===
* 
01 | 
FACTURA
 | 380
   | Invoice
* 
03 
| 
BOLETA DE VENTA
 | 346
   | --
* 
07 
| 
NOTA DE CREDITO
 | 381
   | Credit note
* 
08 
| 
NOTA DE DEBITO
  | 383
   | Debit Note



>
> About invoice sequences, we have developed a module wich has new features
> about invoice sequence defined in the invoice journal.
>

I also do something similar, also was observed but tax authority, that is
the reason on asking, I want to fill tax autority requirements without
break python guidelines.


Best regards




>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/CAN2HbXU6kYsXCcS%3DPNMPG73bqrwr2Ltto5Myj2VmNvpG
> 0N-NXg%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE8p0KsR136V%2BkA0hG%2B008AwiK_mv%2BK0mJHLa0y101h4Pw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

2016-12-04 10:39 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :

> On 2016-12-04 07:29, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > Hi Cedrik
> >
> > 2016-12-04 6:34 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :
> >
> > > On 2016-12-03 21:46, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > > > Hi Cedrik, List
> > > >
> > > > Yes Cedirk, you are right, there is no difference on accounting,
> just on
> > > > the printing, on this way:
> > > >
> > > > - Simple invoice, no taxes must be printed, but the taxes are the
> same
> > > > - Commercial invoice, taxes printing is mandatory as a common
> invoice.
> > >
> > > So I do not see why you could not use the same layout. A simple invoice
> > > with taxes shown will not make it invalid.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, I currently using this layout, however I am having some issues,
> on it
>
> If you do not describe the issue, it is not possible to follow you.
>
> > > > I guess, the main difference is relted to party, no the invoice at
> > > itself.
> > > > As the information provided and the ER diagram, Party could be
> > > categorized
> > > > on :
> > > >
> > > > - Companies, which one just could request for a common or commercial
> > > invoice
> > > > - No companies, this kinds of partyes couldnt request the common
> invoice,
> > > > just simple invoice
> > >
> > > I do not understand the point. You just said that both type does
> exactly
> > > the same.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, on accounting side is the same behavior, but printing report are
> > different. I have solve that on this way
> >
> > - Giving a sub type [ Boleta, Factura ] with diferent sequences
>
> First time, you talk about sequence. What are the requirements?
>
> > Until here all is ok and work perfectly, the issue is:
> >
> > - There is no restruiction on the use. I mean.
> >
> > - Boletas ( Simple invoice ) must be ussed just for NON Companies (
> Parties
> > with no VAT identification )
> > - Facturas ( Current Invoice ) must be used just for COmpanies ( Parties
> > with VATidentification )
> >
> > And the generated problems
> >
> > - A lots of mistakes generated for the final users since there is no a
> > restriction for Parties
> >
> > * Simple invoices generated for Companies that must be nulled later
> > * Comercial invoiced generated for Non COmpanies
> >
> > I need to fins a way on the tryton layout in order to restrict:
>
> I do not understand what you mean, a layout will never restrict
> anything.
>
> > - Parties must have one of this identifiers as unique and main
> identifier:
> >
> > CODE| Description
> > ==
> 
> > * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
> > * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
> > * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
> > * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
> > * 7 | PASAPORTE
> > * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
> >
> > - Based on the before point, commercial or current invoice must be
> > generated just for customer parties with Code 6 ( Companies ) other wise,
> > just simple invoice
> >
> > - That codification must be part of the document party and a combination
> > with the number of the document. I must be suing idetifiers, however
> > identifiers are on a many to many relation ship, I could add more than
> one
> > identifier to one party, that is a legal issue. I could fix it just
> > extending parties.
>
> I do not understand how this can be a legal issue. If the party has many
> identifier, it is something he has.
>
> > - Invoice types must be coded on this way ( There are 19 different
> taxable
> > documents but we could start with this 4):
> >
> >  CODE| Description | Document Name
> > ===
> > * 
> > 01 | 
> > FACTURA
> >  | 380
> >
> > * 
> > 03 
> > | 
> > BOLETA DE VENTA
> >  | 346
> >
> > * 
> > 07 
> > | 
> > NOTA DE CREDITO
> >  | 381
> >
> > * 
> > 08 
> > | 
> > NOTA DE DEBITO
> >   | 383
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > THat is my issues, I have it clear on my side, extend the invoice witha
> > relation ship restriction on the party document type, however I dont want
> > to break trytonic way. That is teh reason on asking the a suggest
>
> I still do not understand what is the problem you try to solve and why.
>
> --
> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/20161204153944.GH71015%40tetsuo.
>


**Hello Cedrik

I wil try to explain again the requirements:

*Party*
=

- Parties must have one of this identifiers as the only one an no more.

CODE| Description
==
* 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
* 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
* 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
* 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
* 7 | PASAPORTE
* A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD

- This type of codification must be part of *the document

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Raimon Esteve

Hie,

You could custom the invoice report and show/hide more fields. Or add
labels depends the party (a boolean field, if party has a
identifier/vat.).

For example, in Spain, a party has'nt a vat (identifier), the report is
"factura simplificada".

About invoice sequences, we have developed a module wich has new features
about invoice sequence defined in the invoice journal.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAN2HbXU6kYsXCcS%3DPNMPG73bqrwr2Ltto5Myj2VmNvpG0N-NXg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Cédric Krier

On 2016-12-04 07:29, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> Hi Cedrik
> 
> 2016-12-04 6:34 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :
> 
> > On 2016-12-03 21:46, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > > Hi Cedrik, List
> > >
> > > Yes Cedirk, you are right, there is no difference on accounting, just on
> > > the printing, on this way:
> > >
> > > - Simple invoice, no taxes must be printed, but the taxes are the same
> > > - Commercial invoice, taxes printing is mandatory as a common invoice.
> >
> > So I do not see why you could not use the same layout. A simple invoice
> > with taxes shown will not make it invalid.
> >
> 
> Yes, I currently using this layout, however I am having some issues, on it

If you do not describe the issue, it is not possible to follow you.

> > > I guess, the main difference is relted to party, no the invoice at
> > itself.
> > > As the information provided and the ER diagram, Party could be
> > categorized
> > > on :
> > >
> > > - Companies, which one just could request for a common or commercial
> > invoice
> > > - No companies, this kinds of partyes couldnt request the common invoice,
> > > just simple invoice
> >
> > I do not understand the point. You just said that both type does exactly
> > the same.
> >
> 
> Yes, on accounting side is the same behavior, but printing report are
> different. I have solve that on this way
> 
> - Giving a sub type [ Boleta, Factura ] with diferent sequences

First time, you talk about sequence. What are the requirements?

> Until here all is ok and work perfectly, the issue is:
> 
> - There is no restruiction on the use. I mean.
> 
> - Boletas ( Simple invoice ) must be ussed just for NON Companies ( Parties
> with no VAT identification )
> - Facturas ( Current Invoice ) must be used just for COmpanies ( Parties
> with VATidentification )
> 
> And the generated problems
> 
> - A lots of mistakes generated for the final users since there is no a
> restriction for Parties
> 
> * Simple invoices generated for Companies that must be nulled later
> * Comercial invoiced generated for Non COmpanies
> 
> I need to fins a way on the tryton layout in order to restrict:

I do not understand what you mean, a layout will never restrict
anything.

> - Parties must have one of this identifiers as unique and main identifier:
> 
> CODE| Description
> ==
> * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
> * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
> * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
> * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
> * 7 | PASAPORTE
> * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
> 
> - Based on the before point, commercial or current invoice must be
> generated just for customer parties with Code 6 ( Companies ) other wise,
> just simple invoice
> 
> - That codification must be part of the document party and a combination
> with the number of the document. I must be suing idetifiers, however
> identifiers are on a many to many relation ship, I could add more than one
> identifier to one party, that is a legal issue. I could fix it just
> extending parties.

I do not understand how this can be a legal issue. If the party has many
identifier, it is something he has.

> - Invoice types must be coded on this way ( There are 19 different taxable
> documents but we could start with this 4):
> 
>  CODE| Description | Document Name
> ===
> * 
> 01 | 
> FACTURA
>  | 380
> 
> * 
> 03 
> | 
> BOLETA DE VENTA
>  | 346
> 
> * 
> 07 
> | 
> NOTA DE CREDITO
>  | 381
> 
> * 
> 08 
> | 
> NOTA DE DEBITO
>   | 383
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THat is my issues, I have it clear on my side, extend the invoice witha
> relation ship restriction on the party document type, however I dont want
> to break trytonic way. That is teh reason on asking the a suggest

I still do not understand what is the problem you try to solve and why.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20161204153944.GH71015%40tetsuo.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Hi Cedrik

2016-12-04 6:34 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :

> On 2016-12-03 21:46, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > Hi Cedrik, List
> >
> > Yes Cedirk, you are right, there is no difference on accounting, just on
> > the printing, on this way:
> >
> > - Simple invoice, no taxes must be printed, but the taxes are the same
> > - Commercial invoice, taxes printing is mandatory as a common invoice.
>
> So I do not see why you could not use the same layout. A simple invoice
> with taxes shown will not make it invalid.
>

Yes, I currently using this layout, however I am having some issues, on it

>
> > I guess, the main difference is relted to party, no the invoice at
> itself.
> > As the information provided and the ER diagram, Party could be
> categorized
> > on :
> >
> > - Companies, which one just could request for a common or commercial
> invoice
> > - No companies, this kinds of partyes couldnt request the common invoice,
> > just simple invoice
>
> I do not understand the point. You just said that both type does exactly
> the same.
>

Yes, on accounting side is the same behavior, but printing report are
different. I have solve that on this way

- Giving a sub type [ Boleta, Factura ] with diferent sequences

Until here all is ok and work perfectly, the issue is:

- There is no restruiction on the use. I mean.

- Boletas ( Simple invoice ) must be ussed just for NON Companies ( Parties
with no VAT identification )
- Facturas ( Current Invoice ) must be used just for COmpanies ( Parties
with VATidentification )

And the generated problems

- A lots of mistakes generated for the final users since there is no a
restriction for Parties

* Simple invoices generated for Companies that must be nulled later
* Comercial invoiced generated for Non COmpanies

I need to fins a way on the tryton layout in order to restrict:

- Parties must have one of this identifiers as unique and main identifier:

CODE| Description
==
* 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
* 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
* 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
* 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
* 7 | PASAPORTE
* A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD

- Based on the before point, commercial or current invoice must be
generated just for customer parties with Code 6 ( Companies ) other wise,
just simple invoice

- That codification must be part of the document party and a combination
with the number of the document. I must be suing idetifiers, however
identifiers are on a many to many relation ship, I could add more than one
identifier to one party, that is a legal issue. I could fix it just
extending parties.

- Invoice types must be coded on this way ( There are 19 different taxable
documents but we could start with this 4):

 CODE| Description | Document Name
===
* 
01 | 
FACTURA
 | 380

* 
03 
| 
BOLETA DE VENTA
 | 346

* 
07 
| 
NOTA DE CREDITO
 | 381

* 
08 
| 
NOTA DE DEBITO
  | 383




THat is my issues, I have it clear on my side, extend the invoice witha
relation ship restriction on the party document type, however I dont want
to break trytonic way. That is teh reason on asking the a suggest


>
> > As explained on before, I am using just a difference on the printing,
> and I
> > use a extra field like "Invoice document type", then I could choice which
> > one will be the final printing. However this is no making a real
> difference
> > between the parties related, since I could select a non company and use
> the
> > common invoice, do you make send?
>
> This will be solved by using the same layout.
>
> --
> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/20161204113420.GF71015%40tetsuo.
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE-x0GZKPykC34MaVJq6ZtLqVOv4TiLr8MfpiZ9YWqvr8Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-04 Thread Cédric Krier

On 2016-12-03 21:46, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> Hi Cedrik, List
> 
> Yes Cedirk, you are right, there is no difference on accounting, just on
> the printing, on this way:
> 
> - Simple invoice, no taxes must be printed, but the taxes are the same
> - Commercial invoice, taxes printing is mandatory as a common invoice.

So I do not see why you could not use the same layout. A simple invoice
with taxes shown will not make it invalid.

> I guess, the main difference is relted to party, no the invoice at itself.
> As the information provided and the ER diagram, Party could be categorized
> on :
> 
> - Companies, which one just could request for a common or commercial invoice
> - No companies, this kinds of partyes couldnt request the common invoice,
> just simple invoice

I do not understand the point. You just said that both type does exactly
the same.

> As explained on before, I am using just a difference on the printing, and I
> use a extra field like "Invoice document type", then I could choice which
> one will be the final printing. However this is no making a real difference
> between the parties related, since I could select a non company and use the
> common invoice, do you make send?

This will be solved by using the same layout.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20161204113420.GF71015%40tetsuo.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-03 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

List

Summarizing, about invoicing on peru.

- There is two kind of invoices: Invoice and Simple Invoice
- There is no difference on accounting or tax policies for both types
- Differences on both invoices are based on make a restriction refered to
the Party Type or party Identifier [ Companies and No Companies ]
- Each invoice type have different printying document

Best regards




2016-12-03 21:46 GMT-05:00 Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto <
carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Cedrik, List
>
> Yes Cedirk, you are right, there is no difference on accounting, just on
> the printing, on this way:
>
> - Simple invoice, no taxes must be printed, but the taxes are the same
> - Commercial invoice, taxes printing is mandatory as a common invoice.
>
> I guess, the main difference is relted to party, no the invoice at itself.
> As the information provided and the ER diagram, Party could be categorized
> on :
>
> - Companies, which one just could request for a common or commercial
> invoice
> - No companies, this kinds of partyes couldnt request the common invoice,
> just simple invoice
>
> As explained on before, I am using just a difference on the printing, and
> I use a extra field like "Invoice document type", then I could choice which
> one will be the final printing. However this is no making a real difference
> between the parties related, since I could select a non company and use the
> common invoice, do you make send?
> What I need is to make a diference related to the party bases on the Party
> Type of identifier. Parties provide a many to many relation ship for
> identifiers, but I need a many to one relationshiop.
>
> A common ER Diagram used for invoicing software is like the provided on my
> attachment, where a party dependence based on the id document type could be
> used. Finaly the invoice type  ( or invoice document type ) could be
> restricted based on the party document type, that is what I am looking for.
>
> My question is about a suggest in order to do a right locale
> custommization, since I will let this module as free for the comunity, and
> I am interested on maked it as much as as posisble as trytonic could be
> done.
>
> I have done some invoicing modules as explained on before, that make no
> sense for the final users, and I countinue making maintenance, but this
> build as a gpl module, musty be tested and 100% trytron
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>
> 2016-12-03 21:25 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :
>
>> On 2016-12-03 08:51, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
>> > Hello People
>> >
>> > I am working on a location for the invoice module. I refer to peruivian
>> > location, and I have this issue:
>> >
>> > We have two kind of out invoices on the printing, but accountant
>> behavior
>> > is the same, however the party customer is different
>> >
>> > - Comercial Invoice (FACTURA), just for Companies
>> > - Simple Invoice (BOLETA DE VENTA), just for Non Companies
>> >
>> > Both of the aaplyes the same taxes, however on the Simple Invoice, is no
>> > necesary to specify the tax ammount.
>> >
>> > Refered to Party, since on Tryton have *Identifiers*, is no necesary to
>> > manage identifiers, however, bahavior is no the same, since on this way
>> on
>> > manage indentifiers, let the prty manage more than once, however, party
>> > just have once identifier, legal identifiers are:
>> >
>> > * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
>> > * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
>> > * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
>> > * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
>> > * 7 | PASAPORTE
>> > * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
>> >
>> >
>> > ID 6 Is just for Companies, then Comercial INvoices are just for them
>> >
>> >
>> > Until now, on a  previous locale version, I have been working on this
>> way:
>> >
>> > - Just one invoice, two different reports, and m,anage indentifiers
>> using
>> > tryton identifiers. The main issue, any kind of customer could have
>> invoice
>> > or simple invoice, and make some errors on the people who will operate
>> the
>> > erp, then I thinking on changing the design
>> >
>> > Any suggest?
>>
>> You did not describe what are the differences between both types of
>> invoices except that tax amount is not necessary but I guess having it
>> it not a problem.
>>
>> --
>> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
>> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
>> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
>> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "tryton" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>> gid/tryton/20161204022554.GD52356%40tetsuo.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
> Senior Software Developer
> Claro RPC +51 989550602
> GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
> GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email
> Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-03 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Hi Cedrik, List

Yes Cedirk, you are right, there is no difference on accounting, just on
the printing, on this way:

- Simple invoice, no taxes must be printed, but the taxes are the same
- Commercial invoice, taxes printing is mandatory as a common invoice.

I guess, the main difference is relted to party, no the invoice at itself.
As the information provided and the ER diagram, Party could be categorized
on :

- Companies, which one just could request for a common or commercial invoice
- No companies, this kinds of partyes couldnt request the common invoice,
just simple invoice

As explained on before, I am using just a difference on the printing, and I
use a extra field like "Invoice document type", then I could choice which
one will be the final printing. However this is no making a real difference
between the parties related, since I could select a non company and use the
common invoice, do you make send?
What I need is to make a diference related to the party bases on the Party
Type of identifier. Parties provide a many to many relation ship for
identifiers, but I need a many to one relationshiop.

A common ER Diagram used for invoicing software is like the provided on my
attachment, where a party dependence based on the id document type could be
used. Finaly the invoice type  ( or invoice document type ) could be
restricted based on the party document type, that is what I am looking for.

My question is about a suggest in order to do a right locale
custommization, since I will let this module as free for the comunity, and
I am interested on maked it as much as as posisble as trytonic could be
done.

I have done some invoicing modules as explained on before, that make no
sense for the final users, and I countinue making maintenance, but this
build as a gpl module, musty be tested and 100% trytron

Best regards








2016-12-03 21:25 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier :

> On 2016-12-03 08:51, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> > Hello People
> >
> > I am working on a location for the invoice module. I refer to peruivian
> > location, and I have this issue:
> >
> > We have two kind of out invoices on the printing, but accountant behavior
> > is the same, however the party customer is different
> >
> > - Comercial Invoice (FACTURA), just for Companies
> > - Simple Invoice (BOLETA DE VENTA), just for Non Companies
> >
> > Both of the aaplyes the same taxes, however on the Simple Invoice, is no
> > necesary to specify the tax ammount.
> >
> > Refered to Party, since on Tryton have *Identifiers*, is no necesary to
> > manage identifiers, however, bahavior is no the same, since on this way
> on
> > manage indentifiers, let the prty manage more than once, however, party
> > just have once identifier, legal identifiers are:
> >
> > * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
> > * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
> > * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
> > * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
> > * 7 | PASAPORTE
> > * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
> >
> >
> > ID 6 Is just for Companies, then Comercial INvoices are just for them
> >
> >
> > Until now, on a  previous locale version, I have been working on this
> way:
> >
> > - Just one invoice, two different reports, and m,anage indentifiers using
> > tryton identifiers. The main issue, any kind of customer could have
> invoice
> > or simple invoice, and make some errors on the people who will operate
> the
> > erp, then I thinking on changing the design
> >
> > Any suggest?
>
> You did not describe what are the differences between both types of
> invoices except that tax amount is not necessary but I guess having it
> it not a problem.
>
> --
> Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
> Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
> Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
> Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "tryton" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tryton/20161204022554.GD52356%40tetsuo.
>



-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE_mRFgWdwECbHCRxytNzm3OYwEnAZ3EN4yD6N6%2BX0M1_A%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-03 Thread Cédric Krier

On 2016-12-03 08:51, Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto wrote:
> Hello People
> 
> I am working on a location for the invoice module. I refer to peruivian
> location, and I have this issue:
> 
> We have two kind of out invoices on the printing, but accountant behavior
> is the same, however the party customer is different
> 
> - Comercial Invoice (FACTURA), just for Companies
> - Simple Invoice (BOLETA DE VENTA), just for Non Companies
> 
> Both of the aaplyes the same taxes, however on the Simple Invoice, is no
> necesary to specify the tax ammount.
> 
> Refered to Party, since on Tryton have *Identifiers*, is no necesary to
> manage identifiers, however, bahavior is no the same, since on this way on
> manage indentifiers, let the prty manage more than once, however, party
> just have once identifier, legal identifiers are:
> 
> * 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
> * 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
> * 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
> * 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
> * 7 | PASAPORTE
> * A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD
> 
> 
> ID 6 Is just for Companies, then Comercial INvoices are just for them
> 
> 
> Until now, on a  previous locale version, I have been working on this way:
> 
> - Just one invoice, two different reports, and m,anage indentifiers using
> tryton identifiers. The main issue, any kind of customer could have invoice
> or simple invoice, and make some errors on the people who will operate the
> erp, then I thinking on changing the design
> 
> Any suggest?

You did not describe what are the differences between both types of
invoices except that tax amount is not necessary but I guess having it
it not a problem.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20161204022554.GD52356%40tetsuo.

[tryton] Invoice Location

2016-12-03 Thread Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto

Hello People

I am working on a location for the invoice module. I refer to peruivian
location, and I have this issue:

We have two kind of out invoices on the printing, but accountant behavior
is the same, however the party customer is different

- Comercial Invoice (FACTURA), just for Companies
- Simple Invoice (BOLETA DE VENTA), just for Non Companies

Both of the aaplyes the same taxes, however on the Simple Invoice, is no
necesary to specify the tax ammount.

Refered to Party, since on Tryton have *Identifiers*, is no necesary to
manage identifiers, however, bahavior is no the same, since on this way on
manage indentifiers, let the prty manage more than once, however, party
just have once identifier, legal identifiers are:

* 0 | DOC.TRIB.NO.DOM.SIN.RUC
* 1 | DOC. NACIONAL DE IDENTIDAD
* 4 | CARNET DE EXTRANJERIA
* 6 | REG. UNICO DE CONTRIBUYENTES
* 7 | PASAPORTE
* A | CED. DIPLOMATICA DE IDENTIDAD


ID 6 Is just for Companies, then Comercial INvoices are just for them


Until now, on a  previous locale version, I have been working on this way:

- Just one invoice, two different reports, and m,anage indentifiers using
tryton identifiers. The main issue, any kind of customer could have invoice
or simple invoice, and make some errors on the people who will operate the
erp, then I thinking on changing the design

Any suggest?

Best regards

-

My ER Diagram is attached,















-- 
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Senior Software Developer
Claro RPC +51 989550602
GTalk: carlos.sotelo.pi...@gmail.com | Skype: csotelop
GNULinux RU #379182 | GNULinux RM #277661

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/CAEhw%3DE9C96WEFJZxJrLcDbZTFZPryirB_N7hX6%3DnYzMk3fARpg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

Re: [tryton] Invoice Location

[tryton] Invoice Location

19 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information