Hi Jacques, were are looking at it but very busy..... Regards, Hans
On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 18:37 +0100, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Hans, > > Inline... > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> > > Jacopo, > > > > Well spotted! I have fixed your concern at r1059279. I wonder how I missed > > that since I was inspired by > > AgreementServices.getCommissionForProduct() :/ > > > > Hans: also could you please look at the catalogs/categories tree: there is > > only Ids in it, at least we should rather have the > > names (with the Ids would be better). Also, if we could have different > > icons for catalogs and categories... > > The reason I insist about that is because I managed some years ago to have > the categories names localized > (DemoProductCategoriesI18nData.xml) and this is lost now there now... > Also why not have the same in Order Manager and why not eCommerce? > Then we should also increase the size of the left panels... > > Thanks > > Jacques > > > Thanks > > > > Jacques > > > > From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> > >>I think that we should not forget about this because the fix proposed by > >>Jacques (thanks for this) should be considered a > >>temporary one... for example it doesn't take into account validity dates of > >>the relationship; as a side note, the same issue > >>(validity dates ignored) was also in the original cod committed by Hans > >>(see the isAlternativePacking method). > >> > >> Kind regards, > >> > >> Jacopo > >> > >> On Jan 10, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Hans, > >>> > >>> This has introduced a bug I fixed at r1057153 > >>> > >>> The isVirtual Product attribute shows around 160 times in > >>> *form*.xml,*een*, *.gro*,*.ftl,*.java files. Of course I did not check > >>> them all. But I'd be surprised if your change has not introduced some > >>> other side effects... > >>> > >>> Could youy please have a look? > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> Jacques > >>> > >>> From: "Hans Bakker" <mailingl...@antwebsystems.com> > >>>> This change is now implemented in r1040908 > >>>> > >>>> Related to the comment from Scott, Instead of using the existing > >>>> association, we have created a new product association 'Alternative > >>>> Packaging' to not interfere with the usage of Scott. > >>>> > >>>> An explanation can be found at: > >>>> https://www.antwebsystems.com/content/control/ViewBlogArticle?articleContentId=16750&blogContentId=AWS_BLOG > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Hans > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 16:06 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>> i could also add a new association type "alternative Uom" and then still > >>>>> use isVirtual=Y/isVariant=Y...which would not block your usage.... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 21:34 +1300, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>>> > Hi Hans, > >>>>> > > >>>>> > I'm still in favor of the approach that I suggested earlier and you > >>>>> > haven't really mentioned why it wouldn't work for you. > >>>>> > If > you like and if you are willing to wait a couple of days I could > >>>>> > show you what I mean with some example entity xml > >>>>> > data. You > could then load it into a demo instance and play around > >>>>> > with it. > >>>>> > > >>>>> > I haven't read your proposal in detail yet but I'm not really in > >>>>> > favor of using the isVirtual=Y/isVariant=Y combination to > > >>>>> > indicate uom specific behavior. I think it is quite possible for a > >>>>> > product to have that combination in real life and using > >>>>> > it > for something else would remove that possibility. Imagine a > >>>>> > variant that is itself also a virtual with its own child > >>>>> > variants. > >>>>> > > >>>>> > Regards > >>>>> > Scott > >>>>> > > >>>>> > HotWax Media > >>>>> > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > >>>>> > > >>>>> > On 11/11/2010, at 8:46 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > A longer explanation how we want to implement this can be found at: > >>>>> > > http://www.antwebsystems.com/control/ViewBlogArticle?contentId=16750&blogContentId=AWS_BLOG > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > Regards, > >>>>> > > Hans > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 16:52 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>> > >> We are are still getting the best solution, help appreciated. > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> We are thinking of the following: > >>>>> > >> you have a product which you sell in pieces and boxes of ten. > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> Then the product per piece is the lowest denominator and has a > >>>>> > >> variant > >>>>> > >> association to a virtual/variant product which is an alternative > >>>>> > >> packaging of the product per piece and can have an adjusted price > >>>>> > >> but no > >>>>> > >> inventory. > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> Currently the e-commerce checks for the virtual flag and want to > >>>>> > >> show a > >>>>> > >> feature selection list, however in the case of the virtual- and > >>>>> > >> variant > >>>>> > >> flag both set, it should not. > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> When the box of 10 is selected, The productId per piece is > >>>>> > >> selected with > >>>>> > >> the adjusted price of the box variant. > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> Comments very much appreciated. > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> Regards, > >>>>> > >> Hans > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 12:13 -0600, David E Jones wrote: > >>>>> > >>> For boxes of a product you'll usually have one product that > >>>>> > >>> represents the individual items (which may or may not be for > >>>>> > >>> > >>> sale directly to the customer), and one that is a product > >>>>> > >>> that represents the box and that is associated with the > >>>>> > >>> > >>> individual item. In OFBiz there are a few different > >>>>> > >>> product types you can choose from to have the system handle > >>>>> > >>> the box in > >>> different ways automatically, or you can use > >>>>> > >>> plain old Finished Good to handle the boxes manually. > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>> For certain products all you need is the three fields already on > >>>>> > >>> the Product entity: > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>> quantityUomId > >>>>> > >>> quantityIncluded > >>>>> > >>> piecesIncluded > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>> For example if you have a six-pack of 12oz soda cans you would > >>>>> > >>> have quantityIncluded=12, quantityUomId=oz, > >>> > >>>>> > >>> piecesIncluded=6. > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>> -David > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>> Hi Scott, this is sure an interesting idea, but then how does > >>>>> > >>>> the system > >>>>> > >>>> know that they are for example 10 pieces in a box? I still what > >>>>> > >>>> to have > >>>>> > >>>> the same inventory for boxes and pieces. > >>>>> > >>>> We should be able to store the conversion between the uom's for > >>>>> > >>>> this > >>>>> > >>>> product somewhere? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> Thanks for you input! > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>> Hans > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 17:39 +1300, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Hans, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Sorry if this is a silly question, but why not just use > >>>>> > >>>>> different products for different UOMs? You could use > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> virtual/variants if you wanted the UOM to be selectable on a > >>>>> > >>>>> single product page and also marketing packages to > > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> automatically produce inventory for the desired UOM from > >>>>> > >>>>> the base UOM. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> > >>>>> Scott > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> HotWax Media > >>>>> > >>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 3/10/2010, at 3:54 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you BJ, > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> I had in mind to create and 'productUomAlternatives' table to > >>>>> > >>>>>> the > >>>>> > >>>>>> product with a conversion for example from pieces to boxes > >>>>> > >>>>>> with an > >>>>> > >>>>>> optional price adjustment percentage. > >>>>> > >>>>>> The system will have however only one uom where everything gets > >>>>> > >>>>>> converted to. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> Anybody else other solutions? > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hans. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 10:21 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>> Yes also like a Feed store will have boxes, Sacks, and loose > >>>>> > >>>>>>> feed. > >>>>> > >>>>>>> I used the multiple pricing model for the Uom Measure > >>>>> > >>>>>>> in the product screen made it allow multiple UOM. > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> added to the code that converts from what is received in > >>>>> > >>>>>>> inventory to > >>>>> > >>>>>>> what is sold so it walks through the Uom. for instance a feed > >>>>> > >>>>>>> store > >>>>> > >>>>>>> Receives feed in Bulk and then sacks it as inventory is > >>>>> > >>>>>>> required. > >>>>> > >>>>>>> The Inventory levels have to be checked to see how many in a > >>>>> > >>>>>>> product > >>>>> > >>>>>>> run to generate to sack up the grain. This Triggers an Seca. > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> I think a nice touch would be that the could generates the > >>>>> > >>>>>>> product data > >>>>> > >>>>>>> to show up in orders, based on the Uoms that were generated > >>>>> > >>>>>>> for the > >>>>> > >>>>>>> products. it would follow the same model for inventory levels > >>>>> > >>>>>>> on the > >>>>> > >>>>>>> orderentry and Ecommerce > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> Hans Bakker sent the following on 10/2/2010 4:29 AM: > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> A question to the community: > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> sometimes the same products are sold with different units of > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> measure. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> Example gold jewelry. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> Per piece, per box of 10, per box of 50 and per gram gold > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> weight. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> Is here a preference how to implement that? > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> Remember this has to show up in e-commerce, orders, > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> shipments and > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> invoices... > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hans > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>> > >>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>> > >>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>> > >>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>> > >>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > -- > > Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>> > > Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>> > > Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
