Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
Locked
Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
 
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
RE: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
RE: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
RE: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
Re: Purchasing services to process components, and receiving processed components
|
|
I'm sorry I never did get time to work on it.
Regards Scott On 5/09/2009, at 3:27 PM, Zhiyong Cui wrote: > > Hi Scott > Did you have finish it , now I need do the same work , could you > give me > some advices ? > > > Scott Gray wrote: >> >> Hi Jonathan >> >> I haven't looked into this very deeply but was pondering it a while >> back. >> >> I had thought about creating a new order type along the lines of >> "GOODS_WORK_ORDER" and then using a combination of the sales order >> code >> (picking, packing and shipping the raw materials) and the purchase >> order >> code (purchasing the service and receipting the serviced products). >> >> I'm afraid I can't help get this done right now, but I could help >> with >> reviewing any work you decide to submit back to OFBiz. >> >> Regards >> Scott >> >> Jonathon -- Improov wrote: >>> Anil, >>> >>>> For associating a Order with WorkEffort, there is Orders tab in >>> WorkEffort >>>> and we can associate a Order to WorkEffort there, It does not let >>>> us >>> specify >>>> OrderItem, But that will be a simple change. >>> >>> Yes, we can make the association there. But such an association >>> doesn't seem to serve any purpose in OFBiz! >>> >>>> Expert Guidence is needed for use of WorkOrderItemFulfillment for >>>> this >>>> purpose. Because now we have a OrderItem created for doing Task >>> specified in >>>> WorkEffort. where as this entity was designed to do just >>>> opposite. I >>> think it >>>> should be ok. >>> >>> You're right. It'll seem wrong to continue using that entity. The >>> mapping was meant to be in the other direction. >>> >>> However, I also agree with you that there shouldn't be any harm in >>> using that entity. That is just a relationship table, not an actual >>> entity. The fact that the relationship between OrderItem and >>> WorkEffort is put in a separate table like that means we can >>> technically have a bidirectional relationship between OrderItem and >>> WorkEffort. >>> >>> It looks like I can even tie > 1 routing tasks to a single OrderItem >>> in a PO. I may want my bicycle frame to be polished, painted, and >>> decal-ed, and I could make all 3 services a single Product (like >>> product Id "DOLL_UP_BICYCLE_FRAME"). >>> >>>> Beyond this point for tracking Outgoing shipment of parts and then >>> receiving >>>> them back into stock and production run, I cannot help much here. >>> >>> Ok. >>> >>> Yeah, there's still some work/planning needed for deciding how a >>> "Service" product in a PO can be received as a "Subassembly" or >>> "Finished Good" product. OFBiz doesn't seem to do this at the >>> moment. >>> >>>> I did this workEffort deep copy thing for Fixed Asset Maintenance >>> project >>>> that I am doing. I am not using Manufacturing component but may be >>> in future >>>> someday. >>> >>> Then I'll look at your deep copy function and see if I can extend or >>> reuse it for what I need here in Manufacturing. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Jonathon >>> >>> Anil Patel wrote: >>>> Jonathon, >>>> I understand what you are saying. All database entities seems to >>>> be in >>>> place. We can tie WorkEffort to OrderItem. >>>> >>>> For associating a Order with WorkEffort, there is Orders tab in >>>> WorkEffort >>>> and we can associate a Order to WorkEffort there, It does not let >>>> us >>>> specify >>>> OrderItem, But that will be a simple change. >>>> >>>> Expert Guidence is needed for use of WorkOrderItemFulfillment >>>> for this >>>> purpose. Because now we have a OrderItem created for doing Task >>>> specified in >>>> WorkEffort. where as this entity was designed to do just >>>> opposite. I >>>> think >>>> it should be ok. >>>> >>>> Beyond this point for tracking Outgoing shipment of parts and then >>>> receiving >>>> them back into stock and production run, I cannot help much here. >>>> >>>> I did this workEffort deep copy thing for Fixed Asset Maintenance >>>> project >>>> that I am doing. I am not using Manufacturing component but may >>>> be in >>>> future >>>> someday. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Anil Patel >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/19/07, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Anil, >>>>> >>>>>> I realize that this is user mailing list, What I am suggesting >>>>>> will >>>>>> take little bit of development work. >>>>> >>>>> It's alright. I believe the dev list is for actual development >>>>> discussions, like a "do we code it >>>>> in a switch-case or a cascading if-else" issue. We're still >>>>> discussing >>>>> whether we (as users) need >>>>> this function. >>>>> >>>>>> The tasks in Production run are nothing but WorkEffort. >>>>> >>>>> Yes. And to confirm and align our understanding... >>>>> >>>>> WorkEffort of type PROD_ORDER_HEADER are production runs. >>>>> >>>>> WorkEffort of type PROD_ORDER_TASK are routing tasks inside >>>>> production >>>>> runs (not defined/template >>>>> routing tasks). >>>>> >>>>> (Above description won't be enough to implement your deep copy, >>>>> but >>>>> please >>>>> bear with me for this >>>>> thread.) >>>>> >>>>> I would like to connect a routing task to a PO when the routing >>>>> task >>>>> calls >>>>> for a sub-contracted >>>>> service, like painting. Naturally, I'll usually need to ship some >>>>> parts to >>>>> my painting vendor for >>>>> processing, so an outgoing shipment will be tied to this PO. >>>>> Further, an >>>>> incoming shipment when >>>>> received should automatically put the processed parts back into >>>>> the >>>>> production run (via "Issue >>>>> Components"?). >>>>> >>>>>> WorkEffort has association with Order entity. >>>>> >>>>> Hmm. I didn't realize OFBiz applications actually do this >>>>> association. >>>>> Does it? Example? >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer to have WorkEffort (production run) tie to OrderItem, >>>>> actually. >>>>> But about the only time >>>>> such an association is made is when customer purchases a >>>>> Configurable >>>>> Product (like PC001) from >>>>> ecommerce storefront, or some rental product (not too sure about >>>>> this). >>>>> I'd definitely like to be >>>>> able to create a production run for every order item in an SO. >>>>> But I >>>>> digress. >>>>> >>>>> How about tying a WorkEffort (routing task) to an OrderItem? That >>>>> could be >>>>> more consistent with >>>>> existing logics. I think that it is semantically better (perhaps >>>>> even >>>>> correct) to tie a routing >>>>> task to an OrderItem inside a PO, rather than to the PO itself. >>>>> >>>>> Also, I might want to have a vendor do 3, not 1, services for me >>>>> all at >>>>> once: painting of some >>>>> parts, decals, brushing. Then I can have 3 routing tasks linked >>>>> to a >>>>> single PO, one for each of >>>>> the 3 OrderItems (painting, decals and brushing). When I receive >>>>> the >>>>> PO, >>>>> I'd like OFBiz to >>>>> automatically complete all 3 routing tasks for me, and pump the >>>>> processed >>>>> components back into >>>>> production run for the following routing tasks. >>>>> >>>>>> So what we can do is, Create a Template WorkEffort (Parent ) >>>>>> for the >>>>>> process that is repeated. This template workEffort can have more >>>>>> then one workeffort Associated with it. Each associated >>>>>> workEffort >>>>>> represents a task (or Step) in process. For the Tasks that will >>>>>> be >>>>>> out sourced, create a Template PO and associate it with >>>>>> WorkEffort. >>>>> >>>>> Hmm. Yes, I like this idea very much. You doing this yet? Or still >>>>> asking >>>>> for inputs before you >>>>> embark on it? >>>>> >>>>> We can work on this together. What you're doing is definitely >>>>> relevant to >>>>> me (and mine to yours?). >>>>> >>>>> Jonathon >>>>> >>>>> Anil Patel wrote: >>>>>> Jonathon, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please forgive my ignorance of Manufacturing terms. Also Now I >>>>> realize >>>>> that >>>>>> this is user mailing list, What I am suggesting will take little >>>>> bit of >>>>>> development work. >>>>>> >>>>>> The tasks in Production run are nothing but WorkEffort. >>>>>> WorkEffort >>>>> has >>>>>> association with Order entity. So what we can do is, Create a >>>>> Template >>>>>> WorkEffort (Parent ) for the process that is repeated. This >>>>>> template >>>>>> workEffort can have more then one workeffort Associated with >>>>>> it. Each >>>>>> associated workEffort represents a task (or Step) in process. >>>>>> For the >>>>> Tasks >>>>>> that will be out sourced, create a Template PO and associate it >>>>>> with >>>>>> WorkEffort. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now for every production run, we do a Deep copy of Parent >>>>>> WorkEffort. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Anil Patel >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1/19/07, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anil, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How does that relate to my question on tying PO/SO to shipment >>>>> and to >>>>>>> WorkEffort (production runs)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are you saying that there can be a tree of production runs, the >>>>> upper >>>>>>> nodes being dependent on the >>>>>>> lower leaves? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, I would have the following production runs: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Production run to manufacture a bicycle frame >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. To paint bicycle frame >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3. To assemble bicycle >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Production run 3 will be top level, and will depend on >>>>>>> production >>>>> run >>>>> 2, >>>>>>> which will in turn >>>>>>> require 1 to be performed first? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Seems like an odd way to break up a production run. More >>>>> convenient to >>>>>>> have all 3 production runs >>>>>>> above be made routing tasks instead, routing tasks that all >>>>>>> reside >>>>> within >>>>>>> a single production run. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd say the more user-friendly way, but more complex at coding >>>>> level, >>>>> is >>>>>>> to have the >>>>>>> sub-contracted routing task (painting) automatically tie to a PO >>>>> buying >>>>>>> painting services. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me know if I understand you correctly? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jonathon >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anil Patel wrote: >>>>>>>> Yesterday I applied a patch to Jira Issue for Deep copy of >>>>> WorkEffort. >>>>>>> Its >>>>>>>> based on Idea of Create a Template WorkEffort (can have >>>>>>>> Assocs) , >>>>> Then >>>>>>> use >>>>>>>> deep copy service to create instance of it. This deep copy >>>>> service >>>>> can >>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> extended to even copy POs associated with WorkEffort. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any Ideas! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> Anil Patel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 1/19/07, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Chris, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've confirmed that OFBiz doesn't do anything near as >>>>> complicated as >>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>> I described below (in >>>>>>>>> 1st post in thread). (Even the routing task type of >>>>> Sub-contracting >>>>>>>>> doesn't do anything?). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'd like to ask the community for advice of "best practices" >>>>> before >>>>> I >>>>>>>>> submit an enhancement. How >>>>>>>>> would you usually go about: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 1. Starting production run. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2. Task1: Produce some parts. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 3. Task2: Ship parts to vendor for painting. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 4. Task3: Assemble painted parts. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For Task2 (step 3 above), I'm proposing we have a PO for the >>>>> painting >>>>>>>>> service, complete with a >>>>>>>>> link from PO to routing task, an outgoing shipment of pre- >>>>>>>>> painted >>>>>>> parts, >>>>>>>>> and an incoming shipment >>>>>>>>> of painted parts. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Has anyone done this yet (not merged into OFBiz)? Is it >>>>>>>>> something >>>>> that >>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> sizable majority of the >>>>>>>>> community would need? How would such a majority propose I do >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>> above? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> TIA for inputs! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jonathon >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jonathon -- Improov wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Chris, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I read that. Nothing on what I'm talking about here. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let me try to get the requirements streamlined or >>>>> simplified, and >>>>>>>>> see if >>>>>>>>>> OFBiz can handle then. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jonathon >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Chris Howe wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> I don't do any manufacturing in my day to day stuff so >>>>>>>>>>> this may not fit your bill exactly, but have you read >>>>>>>>>>> over this: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://ofbizwiki.go-integral.com/Wiki.jsp?page=Manufacturing >>>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --- Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Say I want to send some parts over to a vendor for >>>>>>>>>>>> painting services. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a way to: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Create a product of type "service" named >>>>>>>>>>>> PAINTING, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Create a PO to purchase this service, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Attach to this PO an outgoing shipment ferrying >>>>>>>>>>>> my parts to my vendor, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Receive the PO and have my painted parts in my >>>>>>>>>>>> inventory rather than the >>>>>>>>>>>> product PAINTING. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried product associations like "Product >>>>>>>>>>>> Manufactured As", "New Version, Replacement" and >>>>> "Equivalent or >>>>>>>>>>>> Substitute". Tried associations in >>>>>>>>>>>> both directions. No go. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I can't "manufacture" PAINTING to produce the >>>>>>>>>>>> painted parts. Nor can I purchase PAINTING to receive the >>>>> painted >>>>>>>>> parts. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jonathon >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>>>>> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.0/639 - Release Date: >>>>>>> 1/18/2007 6:47 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>>> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.0/639 - Release Date: >>>>> 1/18/2007 6:47 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.0/639 - Release Date: >>>> 1/18/2007 6:47 PM >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Purchasing-services-to-process-components%2C-and-receiving-processed-components-tp8443719p25304779.html > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > |
smime.p7s (3K) | Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |