On Dec 5, 2007 1:05 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now we change the amount of labor in A1 to L1 = .5 we have to redo over
> 10,000
> assemblies by hand or hack the database. Not very appealing.
>
... and will probably destroy the data integrity of your system.
If a manufacturing process chang
On 10/3/07, Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/2/07, David Tangye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/3/07, Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Perhaps more effort needs to made with the LSMB inst
On 10/3/07, Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Perhaps more effort needs to made with the LSMB installer. I still am not
> > running it because it does not install on a standard ubuntu desktop box.
>
> Agreed, at least as far as Windows goes. But consider Ubuntu. Do you
> *really* want
On 10/3/07, Ashley J Gittins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As I understand it (and I am pretty likely to get this wrong so feel free
> to
> point that out) the only reason we have to send the user/pass on every
> http
> request is because of the change to using postgresql to authenticate every
> r
On 10/3/07, Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think we should separate the issues of storage and transmission. The
> password is always stored at some point in browser memory in plain text (for
> example, when it is entered). It is always submitted to the server in plain
> text in th
On 10/3/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone who thinks a "user" should be able to install LSMB or PostgreSQL
> is frankly, in a fantasy world.
>
OK I guess all the users that use ubuntu, the biggest distro in linux, must
all be in a fantasy world. They just click to install t
>
> Further to what Chris has said, if by 'start from scratch' you mean insert
> everything again, I see no reason why you would do that. Just insert
> *correcting* records with their appropriate dates.
>
-
This SF.net email is
Further to what Chris has said, if by 'start from scratch' you mean insert
everything again, I see no reason why you would that. Just insert records
with their appropriate dates.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
D
I chose to use Joomla, and have been busy it for the past 6 weeks, so I am
not up on specifics of Drupal. I presume that you are happy with the way it
drives the LSMB website already? If so, internationalising it sounds like a
logical step forward. Hopefully you just load the module and carry right
appears in
various places, means I ought to have a C development package of some sort
installed.
Can anyone please tell me what to do next to fix this?
Cheers
David Tangye
--
The Last Great Frontier is in Your Mind
0-install-lsmb-cpan.err
Description: Binary data
0-install-lsmb-cpan.out
Descripti
Josh,
On reflection, see my previous post about intersects. Your post arrived
while I was writing it.
I think Chris, you and I are in agreement in this: Invoice addresses cannot
be changed. The intersects I described will help ensure that if each
address, once linked to almost any entity, invoice
See below.
On 6/22/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Tangye wrote:
> Its not crazy at all. Its correct analysis. And its not necessarily a
> case of duplicate data. Its a snapshot of an event whose information is
> often represented by the same data values eac
See replies below.
Actually, the way it will probably work is that there is a location
table which includes all address info, a table handling a many-many
relationship of locations to contacts
Almost: the intersect we need here is between the Address to Customer
intersect (as per your descri
See responses below.
On 6/21/07, Stroller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 20 Jun 2007, at 22:57, Ed W wrote:
>
> I think we are all agreed that snapshotting the invoice is a
> requirement. But:
>
> - lets assume that most invoices contain the same address time and
> time again,
> - hence we sta
I have followed this thread with amusement. We went through all this 15
years ago, and I am sure others did 15 years before that. The answer is
still the same irrespective of the technology du jour.
Without boring you all with pages of waffle:
1. In system analysis and design, logical and physic
On 5/31/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, like 'Sell', ie a vendor, or 'Buy' ie a customer. That is what I am
> saying.
Except that it is not. Sell is a task performed just as Buy is. A vendor
or customer is a class of entity.
Agreed. I meant to say this, replying to what
On 5/30/07, Chris Travers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok. Think of an entity as a "legal person" (corporate or natural) and
a contact as a "natural person."
Yes, I assume that a 'Contact' is a contact for an Entity. So Chris Travers
can be the contact for Chris Travers. As a physical design
That seems to be going in the right direction. It would be nice to
have comments on the columns, but the usage of most can be guessed by
good naming.
Two questions:
1. Column "entity_class (not null)" in TABLE "entity": is it
something like "current_default/primary_class", whatever that might
be?
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 09:40 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> Hi Ed;
>
>
> > I can't help wondering if the current Quotes/Order/Invoice model isn't
> > slightly too few states for some business.
> >
> > My model is: [snip]
Its a bit of a problem in a way, that the implied business operational
model
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 19:47 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> Actually, I would slightly quibble with this point. Rather than
> define terms precisely (since natural language is descriptive rather
> than prescriptive), it is a good idea to discuss what we mean by what
> we say and challenge eachother
Oh dear: this is quite long. Sorry, but I had a cup of tea and a think,
and decided it is appropriate as is.
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 10:22 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> ... or I beating
> someone into doing it right through team collaboration and positive
> reinforcement (2x4, hose, or weed pull
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 19:36 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> On 4/26/07, Gerald Chudyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Are you planning total integration between accounting modules? I
> > designed a gl like this once. The issues with ar and ap are fairly
> > clear; each transaction is a db/cr to a f
Sorry, now I am confused. The statements below seem contradictory.
On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 18:52 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> No. New company datasets are safe.
>
> On 4/15/07, David Tangye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 18:28 -0700, Chris Travers wrote
On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 18:28 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> If you have a new database (not an upgrade) and you want to bill for
> fractional quantities (say, 0.25), run the following queries on your
> database:
>
> alter table invoice alter column qty type numeric;
> alter table invoice alter colum
On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 19:08 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> The idea of a single global setting for date entry is not a bad one.
> Feel free to submit a feature request.
OK, done: 1700856
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by D
On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 13:56 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Actually I would say that is up to Chris M. If he choses to make it a
> public issue, because he feels others are possibly going to be effected
> the same way, then that is up to him.
>
> Further if he wishes to keep it a private matter
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:11 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> In short:
>
> Programmers will want the templates on disk. This makes sense.
> Non Programmers don't even know what a text editor is.
> Our target audience is Non Programmers.
That's why I liked the idea of having the value for the data-
On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 14:54 -0400, Christopher Murtagh wrote (regarding
templates):
> I'm all for it. Everything that is outside of svn should be in the DB
> IMO, because it's not code, it's data.
Aren't templates (and C etc header files for example) a bit of a grey
area in that they can represen
On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 21:38 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> I have been planning a payroll module, but there is always room for
> more help :-). I will post my ideas here.
Hi Chris. Your forward plan looked realistic to me, mainly for two
reasons: you did not try to include:
1. taxes
2. payroll.
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 09:05 -0500, Seneca Cunningham wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:55:04AM -0500, Michael Schultheiss wrote:
> > Seneca Cunningham wrote:
> > > Hi, I'm the LedgerSMB developer who made the packages. The current
> > > packaging is currently a bit on the crude side ...
On Thu,
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 11:21 -0800, Chris Travers wrote:
> Hi Josh;
>
> That is the basic idea. This is the way it currently works and we
> wanted to get the current system stored in the db. And I do have some
> customers that need multiple dataset capabilities (for example, a
> small business ow
31 matches
Mail list logo
