Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
Locked
12
12
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
 
|
An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and protocols
is a widely accepted solution. Best regards Pierre On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. > > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Thanks all your suggestions. > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow lead > to > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to use > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the discussed > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and > most > > flexible way. > > > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's > cut a > > JIRA to proceed with it. > > > > Thanks, > > Swapnil > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM > > To: [hidden email] > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > Hi all, > > > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or > without > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory > > transfer functionalities in the future. > > > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment > > > > Regards, > > James Yong > > > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs processed > > > through this single transfer shipment. > > > What it would mean is that: > > > > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From Vendor’ > and > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both originating > and > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or > business > > > entity). > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items > (even > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then > move > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s status > can > > > also be > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the tune > of > > > shipped > > > units. > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against > linked > > > RO. > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the ‘Shipped’ RO > > > (similar to > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that > was > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to > > > the > > > tune of received units. > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment > to > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be > > > marked as > > > ‘Completed’. > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the > > > process > > > wherever needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over > > > complicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM > > > To: [hidden email] > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks James for the reply. > > > > > > > > > > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase > > > order. > > > > > > > > > > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that > > > order is > > > > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same). > > > > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus > > > entity. > > > > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. > > > > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. > > > > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. > > > > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products > > > at a > > > > > > time. > > > > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model. > > > > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer > > > > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with > > > inventory > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please correct me if I missed something. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support > > > > inventory > > > > > > > transfer with shipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as > > > > discussed > > > > > > > earlier) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock > > > > > > > > transfer flow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., > > > > > so > > > > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity. > > > > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of > > > > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current > > > implementation) : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and > > > > > receiver > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So > > > business > > > > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or > > > > > > > purchase > > > > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > payment > > > > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. > > > > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its > > > > > applicability > > > > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or > > > > > > > > country/state-specific > > > > > > > tax > > > > > > > > regulations. For example: > > > > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state > > > > > might be > > > > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at > > > > > > > > different rate in > > > > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax > > > > > > > > regulations can > > > > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company > > > > > > > > goods transfer > > > > > > > > are even taxable or not) > > > > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: > > > > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in > > > > > this > > > > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to be > > > > > issued > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on > > > > > > > > the inter-state > > > > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) > > > > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having > > > > > single > > > > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches with > > > > > > > > tax authority then *there > > > > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be > > > issue. > > > > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods. > > > > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches with > > > > > > > > tax authority then *there > > > > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate “Tax > > > > > > > Invoice†* > > > > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. > > > > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to > > > > > the > > > state > > > > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in > > > > > this > > > case. > > > > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status > > > > > transitioning > > > > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ (from > > > > > originating > > > > > > > facility) à > > > > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination facility). > > > > > As it needs to > > > be > > > > > > > > tracked internally. > > > > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the > > > > > > > transferred > > > > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL > > > > > > > > accounts > > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in > > > > > > > accordance > > > > > > > > with business rules). > > > > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically > > > > > > > > build > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement > > > > > for > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > common > > > > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets > > > > > > > > implemented) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution > > > > > that > > > > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > > > > > <[hidden email]>] > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as > > > > > mentioned > > > > > > > earlier > > > > > > > > to manage group transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to > > > > > enable > > > > > > > > shipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is > > > > > selected, > > > > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be > > > created. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & > PO. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can > > > > > only > > > > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to > > > > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <[hidden email]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Requirements > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one > > > > > > > > > product > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > > > > > Shipment > > > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > > > > > > > > Accounting > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on > > > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" > > > > > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > respective transfer order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a > > > > > > > > > "Transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the > > > > > > PO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product" > > > > > > > workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes James, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email] > > > > > > > >] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > > > > > > records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common > > > > > > > > > > info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah > > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any > > > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single > > > > > > > > shipment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > product). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the > > > > > > > > existing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > single transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as > > > > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail > > > etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < > > > > > > > [hidden email]>] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory > > > > > > > > > > > Item > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the > > > > > > > > > > > Inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Transfer table. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item > > > > > > > > > > > > Detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > table? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store > > > > > > > > > > transferred > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Problem > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get > > > > > > > > > > exact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history > > > > > > > maintenance > > > > > > > > of records. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme no. > > > > > > > > > > 78, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ |
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
|
|
Hello All,
Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs. Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task. -- Thanks and Regards, *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore, M.P, India - 452010 Cell phone: +91 9977705687 On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> wrote: > An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and protocols > is a widely accepted solution. > > Best regards > > Pierre > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. > > > > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > Thanks all your suggestions. > > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow > lead > > to > > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to > use > > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the > discussed > > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and > > most > > > flexible way. > > > > > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's > > cut a > > > JIRA to proceed with it. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Swapnil > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM > > > To: [hidden email] > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > records > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or > > without > > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory > > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase > > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory > > > transfer functionalities in the future. > > > > > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. > > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment > > > > > > Regards, > > > James Yong > > > > > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > > wrote: > > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that > > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a > > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order > > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type > > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new > Shipment > > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs processed > > > > through this single transfer shipment. > > > > What it would mean is that: > > > > > > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating > > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination > > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From > Vendor’ > > and > > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both originating > > and > > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or > > business > > > > entity). > > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items > > (even > > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). > > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in > a > > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. > > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then > > move > > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s status > > can > > > > also be > > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the > tune > > of > > > > shipped > > > > units. > > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against > > linked > > > > RO. > > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the ‘Shipped’ > RO > > > > (similar to > > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment > that > > was > > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand > to > > > > the > > > > tune of received units. > > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment > > to > > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be > > > > marked as > > > > ‘Completed’. > > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the > > > > process > > > > wherever needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other > > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over > > > > complicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks James for the reply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data > > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for > inventory > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for > > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using > sales/purchase > > > > order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while > > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of > > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that > > > > order is > > > > > > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same). > > > > > > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus > > > > entity. > > > > > > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. > > > > > > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. > > > > > > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. > > > > > > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products > > > > at a > > > > > > > > time. > > > > > > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data > model. > > > > > > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer > > > > > > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please correct me if I missed something. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > > > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <[hidden email]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > transfer with shipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as > > > > > discussed > > > > > > > > > earlier) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock > > > > > > > > > > transfer flow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business > entity. > > > > > > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of > > > > > > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current > > > > implementation) : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange > but > > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and > > > > > > receiver > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So > > > > business > > > > > > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or > > > > > > > > > purchase > > > > > > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real > > > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > payment > > > > > > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. > > > > > > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its > > > > > > applicability > > > > > > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or > > > > > > > > > > country/state-specific > > > > > > > > > tax > > > > > > > > > > regulations. For example: > > > > > > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state > > > > > > might be > > > > > > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at > > > > > > > > > > different rate in > > > > > > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax > > > > > > > > > > regulations can > > > > > > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company > > > > > > > > > > goods transfer > > > > > > > > > > are even taxable or not) > > > > > > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: > > > > > > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and > in > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to be > > > > > > issued > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document (depending > on > > > > > > > > > > the inter-state > > > > > > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) > > > > > > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having > > > > > > single > > > > > > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches with > > > > > > > > > > tax authority then *there > > > > > > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to > be > > > > issue. > > > > > > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods. > > > > > > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having > > > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches with > > > > > > > > > > tax authority then *there > > > > > > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate > “Tax > > > > > > > > > Invoice†* > > > > > > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. > > > > > > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to > > > > > > the > > > > state > > > > > > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in > > > > > > this > > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status > > > > > > transitioning > > > > > > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ (from > > > > > > originating > > > > > > > > > facility) à > > > > > > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination facility). > > > > > > As it needs to > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > tracked internally. > > > > > > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the > > > > > > > > > transferred > > > > > > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL > > > > > > > > > > accounts > > > > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in > > > > > > > > > accordance > > > > > > > > > > with business rules). > > > > > > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically > > > > > > > > > > build > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the > > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > common > > > > > > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets > > > > > > > > > > implemented) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > > > > > > <[hidden email]>] > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM > > > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as > > > > > > mentioned > > > > > > > > > earlier > > > > > > > > > > to manage group transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is > reasonable > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to > > > > > > enable > > > > > > > > > > shipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is > > > > > > selected, > > > > > > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be > > > > created. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO > & > > PO. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to > > > > > > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems. > com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Requirements > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one > > > > > > > > > > > product > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > > > > > > Shipment > > > > > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > > > > > > > > > > Accounting > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) > on > > > > > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" > > > > > > > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > respective transfer order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a > > > > > > > > > > > "Transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". > Business > > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the > > > > > > > PO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of > > > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product" > > > > > > > > > workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes James, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain > > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email] > > > > > > > > > >] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > > > > > > > records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or > common > > > > > > > > > > > > info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah > > > > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single > > > > > > > > > shipment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > product). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the > > > > > > > > > existing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > single transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as > > > > > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via > > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail > > > > etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < > > > > > > > > > [hidden email]>] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > Item > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the > > > > > > > > > > > > > Inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Transfer table. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[hidden email]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > table? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory > item > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store > > > > > > > > > > > transferred > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Problem > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get > > > > > > > > > > > exact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history > > > > > > > > > maintenance > > > > > > > > > > of records. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme no. > > > > > > > > > > > 78, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Pierre Smits > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > |
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
|
|
Hello All,
I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task. -- Thanks and Regards, *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore, M.P, India - 452010 Cell phone: +91 9977705687 On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hello All, > > Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs. > > Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket > created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task. > > -- > Thanks and Regards, > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and protocols >> is a widely accepted solution. >> >> Best regards >> >> Pierre >> >> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. >> > >> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> > > Thanks all your suggestions. >> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow >> lead >> > to >> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to >> use >> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the >> discussed >> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain >> and >> > most >> > > flexible way. >> > > >> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's >> > cut a >> > > JIRA to proceed with it. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Swapnil >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] >> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM >> > > To: [hidden email] >> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >> records >> > > >> > > Hi all, >> > > >> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or >> > without >> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory >> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase >> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory >> > > transfer functionalities in the future. >> > > >> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. >> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > James Yong >> > > >> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> >> > wrote: >> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment >> that >> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a >> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order >> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type >> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new >> Shipment >> > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs processed >> > > > through this single transfer shipment. >> > > > What it would mean is that: >> > > > >> > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating >> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination >> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From >> Vendor’ >> > and >> > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both originating >> > and >> > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or >> > business >> > > > entity). >> > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items >> > (even >> > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). >> > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO >> in a >> > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. >> > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then >> > move >> > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s >> status >> > can >> > > > also be >> > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the >> tune >> > of >> > > > shipped >> > > > units. >> > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against >> > linked >> > > > RO. >> > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the ‘Shipped’ >> RO >> > > > (similar to >> > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment >> that >> > was >> > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On >> hand to >> > > > the >> > > > tune of received units. >> > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the >> shipment >> > to >> > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be >> > > > marked as >> > > > ‘Completed’. >> > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the >> > > > process >> > > > wherever needed. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against >> other >> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over >> > > > complicated. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > >> > > > Swapnil >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] >> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM >> > > > To: [hidden email] >> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Hello All, >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Thanks James for the reply. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data >> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for >> inventory >> > > > transfer. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO >> for >> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using >> sales/purchase >> > > > order. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while >> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of >> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that >> > > > order is >> > > > >> > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same). >> > > > >> > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus >> > > > entity. >> > > > >> > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. >> > > > >> > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. >> > > > >> > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. >> > > > >> > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products >> > > > at a >> > > > >> > > > time. >> > > > >> > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data >> model. >> > > > >> > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer >> > > > >> > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with >> > > > inventory >> > > > >> > > > transfer. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Please correct me if I missed something. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Thanks & Regards >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Vaibhav Jain >> > > > >> > > > Hotwax Systems, >> > > > >> > > > [hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <[hidden email]> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Hi Swapnil, >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. >> > > > >> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support >> > > > > inventory >> > > > >> > > > > transfer with shipment. >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as >> > > > > discussed >> > > > >> > > > > earlier) >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > James Yong >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email] >> > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock >> > > > >> > > > > > transfer flow. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., >> > > > > > so >> > > > >> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business >> entity. >> > > > >> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of >> > > > >> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to >> current >> > > > implementation) : >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange >> but >> > > > >> > > > > > there >> > > > >> > > > > is >> > > > >> > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and >> > > > > > receiver >> > > > >> > > > > > as >> > > > >> > > > > they >> > > > >> > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So >> > > > business >> > > > >> > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales >> or >> > > > >> > > > > purchase >> > > > >> > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real >> > > > >> > > > > > time >> > > > >> > > > > payment >> > > > >> > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. >> > > > >> > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its >> > > > > > applicability >> > > > >> > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or >> > > > >> > > > > > country/state-specific >> > > > >> > > > > tax >> > > > >> > > > > > regulations. For example: >> > > > >> > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state >> > > > > > might be >> > > > >> > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at >> > > > >> > > > > > different rate in >> > > > >> > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR >> tax >> > > > >> > > > > > regulations can >> > > > >> > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently >> intra-company >> > > > >> > > > > > goods transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > are even taxable or not) >> > > > >> > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods >> > > > > > transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > is >> > > > >> > > > > now >> > > > >> > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: >> > > > >> > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and >> in >> > > > > > this >> > > > >> > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to be >> > > > > > issued >> > > > >> > > > > > along >> > > > >> > > > > with >> > > > >> > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document (depending >> on >> > > > >> > > > > > the inter-state >> > > > >> > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) >> > > > >> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is >> having >> > > > > > single >> > > > >> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches >> with >> > > > >> > > > > > tax authority then *there >> > > > >> > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to >> be >> > > > issue. >> > > > >> > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the >> goods. >> > > > >> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is >> having >> > > > >> > > > > different >> > > > >> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches >> with >> > > > >> > > > > > tax authority then *there >> > > > >> > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate >> “Tax >> > > > >> > > > > Invoice†* >> > > > >> > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. >> > > > >> > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to >> > > > > > the >> > > > state >> > > > >> > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in >> > > > > > this >> > > > case. >> > > > >> > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status >> > > > > > transitioning >> > > > >> > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ >> (from >> > > > > > originating >> > > > >> > > > > facility) à >> > > > >> > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination facility). >> > > > > > As it needs to >> > > > be >> > > > >> > > > > > tracked internally. >> > > > >> > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the >> > > > >> > > > > transferred >> > > > >> > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL >> > > > >> > > > > > accounts >> > > > >> > > > > per >> > > > >> > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in >> > > > >> > > > > accordance >> > > > >> > > > > > with business rules). >> > > > >> > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to >> systemically >> > > > >> > > > > > build >> > > > >> > > > > the >> > > > >> > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the >> > > > > > individual >> > > > >> > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement >> > > > > > for >> > > > >> > > > > > a >> > > > >> > > > > common >> > > > >> > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like >> > > > >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets >> > > > >> > > > > > implemented) >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution >> > > > > > that >> > > > >> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Swapnil >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] >> > > > > > <[hidden email]>] >> > > > >> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM >> > > > >> > > > > > To: [hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as >> > > > > > mentioned >> > > > >> > > > > earlier >> > > > >> > > > > > to manage group transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is >> reasonable >> > > > >> > > > > > since >> > > > >> > > > > we >> > > > >> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to >> > > > > > enable >> > > > >> > > > > > shipment. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is >> > > > > > selected, >> > > > >> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be >> > > > created. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer >> SO & >> > PO. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can >> > > > > > only >> > > > >> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO >> to >> > > > >> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > James Yong >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain < >> [hidden email]> >> > > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Requirements >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > like: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one >> > > > >> > > > > > > product >> > > > >> > > > > in >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > any inventory transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with >> > > > > > > Shipment >> > > > >> > > > > which is >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > missing. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with >> > > > >> > > > > > > Accounting >> > > > >> > > > > which >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > is missing. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) >> on >> > > > >> > > > > inventory >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" >> > > > >> > > > > documentation. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) >> > > > > > > with >> > > > >> > > > > > > the >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > respective transfer order. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to >> Order >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a >> > > > >> > > > > > > "Transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". >> Business >> > > > >> > > > > > > does >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO >> > > > > > > should >> > > > >> > > > > > > be >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the >> > > > > > > PO >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive >> product" >> > > > > > > is >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of >> > > > >> > > > > > > transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive >> Product" >> > > > >> > > > > workflow. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > [hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Yes James, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled >> > > > > > > > with >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item >> > > > > > > > transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain >> > > > > > > > data >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., >> > > > >> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Swapnil >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > > > > > <[hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > > >] >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >> > > > > > > > records >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or >> common >> > > > >> > > > > > > > info >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each >> InventoryTransfer >> > > > >> > > > > > > > will >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > James Yong >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah >> > > > >> > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> >> > > > >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Folks, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is >> generally >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > for >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single >> > > > > > > > > shipment >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence >> > > > > > > > > only >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > one >> > > > >> > > > > > product). >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the >> > > > > > > > > existing >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied >> > > > > > > > > with >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > a >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > single transfer >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it >> as >> > > > > > > > > well. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > + Of >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via >> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail >> > > > etc. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases >> > > > > > > > > and >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Swapnil >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < >> > > > >> > > > > [hidden email]>] >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >> records >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi all, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to >> Inventory >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Item >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Detail >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Inventory >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Transfer table. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > What do you think? >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > James Yong >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[hidden email]> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory >> Item >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Detail >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > table? >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > James Yong >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hello, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory >> item >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > is >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > inventory >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > transfer. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store >> > > > > > > > > > > transferred >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > quantity >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Problem >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get >> > > > > > > > > > > exact >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history >> > > > >> > > > > maintenance >> > > > >> > > > > > of records. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer >> > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme no. >> > > > > > > > > > > 78, >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> -- >> Pierre Smits >> >> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> >> OFBiz based solutions & services >> >> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace >> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >> > > |
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
|
|
Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365<
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>. -- Thanks and Regards, *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore, M.P, India - 452010 Cell phone: +91 9977705687 On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hello All, > > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task. > > -- > Thanks and Regards, > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma < > [hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hello All, >> >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs. >> >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task. >> >> -- >> Thanks and Regards, >> >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010 >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687 >> >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and >>> protocols >>> is a widely accepted solution. >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. >>> > >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> >>> wrote: >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions. >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow >>> lead >>> > to >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference >>> to use >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the >>> discussed >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain >>> and >>> > most >>> > > flexible way. >>> > > >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then >>> let's >>> > cut a >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, >>> > > Swapnil >>> > > >>> > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM >>> > > To: [hidden email] >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >>> records >>> > > >>> > > Hi all, >>> > > >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or >>> > without >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and >>> Purchase >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand >>> inventory >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future. >>> > > >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment >>> > > >>> > > Regards, >>> > > James Yong >>> > > >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment >>> that >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new >>> Shipment >>> > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs processed >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment. >>> > > > What it would mean is that: >>> > > > >>> > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From >>> Vendor’ >>> > and >>> > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both >>> originating >>> > and >>> > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or >>> > business >>> > > > entity). >>> > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items >>> > (even >>> > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). >>> > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO >>> in a >>> > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. >>> > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility >>> then >>> > move >>> > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s >>> status >>> > can >>> > > > also be >>> > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the >>> tune >>> > of >>> > > > shipped >>> > > > units. >>> > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against >>> > linked >>> > > > RO. >>> > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the >>> ‘Shipped’ RO >>> > > > (similar to >>> > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment >>> that >>> > was >>> > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On >>> hand to >>> > > > the >>> > > > tune of received units. >>> > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the >>> shipment >>> > to >>> > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also >>> be >>> > > > marked as >>> > > > ‘Completed’. >>> > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the >>> > > > process >>> > > > wherever needed. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against >>> other >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks >>> over >>> > > > complicated. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks, >>> > > > >>> > > > Swapnil >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM >>> > > > To: [hidden email] >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >>> records >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Hello All, >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for >>> inventory >>> > > > transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO >>> for >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using >>> sales/purchase >>> > > > order. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that >>> > > > order is >>> > > > >>> > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are >>> same). >>> > > > >>> > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus >>> > > > entity. >>> > > > >>> > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. >>> > > > >>> > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. >>> > > > >>> > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. >>> > > > >>> > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple >>> products >>> > > > at a >>> > > > >>> > > > time. >>> > > > >>> > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data >>> model. >>> > > > >>> > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with >>> > > > inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks & Regards >>> > > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain >>> > > > >>> > > > Hotwax Systems, >>> > > > >>> > > > [hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <[hidden email]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil, >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. >>> > > > >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support >>> > > > > inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > > transfer with shipment. >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as >>> > > > > discussed >>> > > > >>> > > > > earlier) >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > James Yong >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email] >>> m> >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to >>> stock >>> > > > >>> > > > > > transfer flow. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement >>> i.e., >>> > > > > > so >>> > > > >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business >>> entity. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of >>> > > > >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to >>> current >>> > > > implementation) : >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange >>> but >>> > > > >>> > > > > > there >>> > > > >>> > > > > is >>> > > > >>> > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and >>> > > > > > receiver >>> > > > >>> > > > > > as >>> > > > >>> > > > > they >>> > > > >>> > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. >>> So >>> > > > business >>> > > > >>> > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales >>> or >>> > > > >>> > > > > purchase >>> > > > >>> > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any >>> real >>> > > > >>> > > > > > time >>> > > > >>> > > > > payment >>> > > > >>> > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its >>> > > > > > applicability >>> > > > >>> > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or >>> > > > >>> > > > > > country/state-specific >>> > > > >>> > > > > tax >>> > > > >>> > > > > > regulations. For example: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state >>> > > > > > might be >>> > > > >>> > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at >>> > > > >>> > > > > > different rate in >>> > > > >>> > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR >>> tax >>> > > > >>> > > > > > regulations can >>> > > > >>> > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently >>> intra-company >>> > > > >>> > > > > > goods transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > are even taxable or not) >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods >>> > > > > > transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > is >>> > > > >>> > > > > now >>> > > > >>> > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability >>> and in >>> > > > > > this >>> > > > >>> > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to be >>> > > > > > issued >>> > > > >>> > > > > > along >>> > > > >>> > > > > with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document >>> (depending on >>> > > > >>> > > > > > the inter-state >>> > > > >>> > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is >>> having >>> > > > > > single >>> > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches >>> with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there >>> > > > >>> > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs >>> to be >>> > > > issue. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the >>> goods. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is >>> having >>> > > > >>> > > > > different >>> > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches >>> with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there >>> > > > >>> > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate >>> “Tax >>> > > > >>> > > > > Invoice†* >>> > > > >>> > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to >>> > > > > > the >>> > > > state >>> > > > >>> > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in >>> > > > > > this >>> > > > case. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status >>> > > > > > transitioning >>> > > > >>> > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ >>> (from >>> > > > > > originating >>> > > > >>> > > > > facility) à >>> > > > >>> > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination >>> facility). >>> > > > > > As it needs to >>> > > > be >>> > > > >>> > > > > > tracked internally. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the >>> > > > >>> > > > > transferred >>> > > > >>> > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL >>> > > > >>> > > > > > accounts >>> > > > >>> > > > > per >>> > > > >>> > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority >>> (in >>> > > > >>> > > > > accordance >>> > > > >>> > > > > > with business rules). >>> > > > >>> > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to >>> systemically >>> > > > >>> > > > > > build >>> > > > >>> > > > > the >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the >>> > > > > > individual >>> > > > >>> > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement >>> > > > > > for >>> > > > >>> > > > > > a >>> > > > >>> > > > > common >>> > > > >>> > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like >>> > > > >>> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets >>> > > > >>> > > > > > implemented) >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution >>> > > > > > that >>> > > > >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Swapnil >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > > >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] >>> > > > > > <[hidden email]>] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM >>> > > > >>> > > > > > To: [hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >>> records >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as >>> > > > > > mentioned >>> > > > >>> > > > > earlier >>> > > > >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is >>> reasonable >>> > > > >>> > > > > > since >>> > > > >>> > > > > we >>> > > > >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to >>> > > > > > enable >>> > > > >>> > > > > > shipment. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is >>> > > > > > selected, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will >>> be >>> > > > created. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer >>> SO & >>> > PO. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can >>> > > > > > only >>> > > > >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO >>> to >>> > > > >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > James Yong >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain < >>> [hidden email]> >>> > > > >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Requirements >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > like: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > product >>> > > > >>> > > > > in >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > any inventory transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with >>> > > > > > > Shipment >>> > > > >>> > > > > which is >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > missing. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Accounting >>> > > > >>> > > > > which >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > is missing. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after >>> GST) on >>> > > > >>> > > > > inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" >>> > > > >>> > > > > documentation. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) >>> > > > > > > with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > the >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > respective transfer order. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to >>> Order >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > "Transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". >>> Business >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > does >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO >>> > > > > > > should >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > be >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass >>> the >>> > > > > > > PO >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive >>> product" >>> > > > > > > is >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive >>> Product" >>> > > > >>> > > > > workflow. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Yes James, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled >>> > > > > > > > with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item >>> > > > > > > > transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain >>> > > > > > > > data >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer >>> with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., >>> > > > >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > > >] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >>> > > > > > > > records >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or >>> common >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > info >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each >>> InventoryTransfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > will >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > James Yong >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Folks, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is >>> generally >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > for >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single >>> > > > > > > > > shipment >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given >>> inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence >>> > > > > > > > > only >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > one >>> > > > >>> > > > > > product). >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the >>> > > > > > > > > existing >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied >>> > > > > > > > > with >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > a >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it >>> as >>> > > > > > > > > well. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + Of >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail >>> > > > etc. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business >>> cases >>> > > > > > > > > and >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < >>> > > > >>> > > > > [hidden email]>] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer >>> records >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to >>> Inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Item >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Detail >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think? >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[hidden email]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory >>> Item >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > table? >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory >>> item >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after >>> completing >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > transfer. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory >>> item. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history >>> > > > >>> > > > > maintenance >>> > > > >>> > > > > > of records. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > -- >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer >>> > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme >>> no. >>> > > > > > > > > > > 78, >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> -- >>> Pierre Smits >>> >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> >>> OFBiz based solutions & services >>> >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >>> >> >> > |
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
|
|
Hello Pawan,
Inventory transfer is a type of order. So, IMO instead of introducing a new data model for inventory transfer, we should use Order data model. +1 for Design approach #3 Thanks & Regards Vaibhav Jain Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer HotWax Systems m: 782-834-1900 e: [hidden email] On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Pawan Verma <[hidden email]> wrote: > Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365< > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>. > > -- > Thanks and Regards, > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > Indore, > M.P, India - 452010 > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma < > [hidden email]> > wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement > > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We > > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task. > > > > -- > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > > Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma < > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > >> Hello All, > >> > >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs. > >> > >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket > >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task. > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks and Regards, > >> > >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > >> > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and > >>> protocols > >>> is a widely accepted solution. > >>> > >>> Best regards > >>> > >>> Pierre > >>> > >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. > >>> > > >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions. > >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow > >>> lead > >>> > to > >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference > >>> to use > >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the > >>> discussed > >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain > >>> and > >>> > most > >>> > > flexible way. > >>> > > > >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then > >>> let's > >>> > cut a > >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it. > >>> > > > >>> > > Thanks, > >>> > > Swapnil > >>> > > > >>> > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] > >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM > >>> > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > >>> > > Hi all, > >>> > > > >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with > or > >>> > without > >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for > inventory > >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and > >>> Purchase > >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand > >>> inventory > >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future. > >>> > > > >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. > >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment > >>> > > > >>> > > Regards, > >>> > > James Yong > >>> > > > >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment > >>> that > >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as > a > >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take > Order > >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order > type > >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new > >>> Shipment > >>> > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs > processed > >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment. > >>> > > > What it would mean is that: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating > >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination > >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From > >>> Vendor’ > >>> > and > >>> > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both > >>> originating > >>> > and > >>> > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or > >>> > business > >>> > > > entity). > >>> > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO > items > >>> > (even > >>> > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). > >>> > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO > >>> in a > >>> > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. > >>> > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility > >>> then > >>> > move > >>> > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s > >>> status > >>> > can > >>> > > > also be > >>> > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the > >>> tune > >>> > of > >>> > > > shipped > >>> > > > units. > >>> > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) > against > >>> > linked > >>> > > > RO. > >>> > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the > >>> ‘Shipped’ RO > >>> > > > (similar to > >>> > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment > >>> that > >>> > was > >>> > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On > >>> hand to > >>> > > > the > >>> > > > tune of received units. > >>> > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the > >>> shipment > >>> > to > >>> > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also > >>> be > >>> > > > marked as > >>> > > > ‘Completed’. > >>> > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in > the > >>> > > > process > >>> > > > wherever needed. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against > >>> other > >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks > >>> over > >>> > > > complicated. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] > >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM > >>> > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Hello All, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate > data > >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for > >>> inventory > >>> > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO > >>> for > >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using > >>> sales/purchase > >>> > > > order. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while > >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead > of > >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify > that > >>> > > > order is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are > >>> same). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in > OrderStatus > >>> > > > entity. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple > >>> products > >>> > > > at a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > time. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data > >>> model. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with > >>> > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks & Regards > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Hotwax Systems, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong < > [hidden email]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support > >>> > > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > transfer with shipment. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as > >>> > > > > discussed > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > earlier) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah < > [hidden email] > >>> m> > >>> > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to > >>> stock > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > transfer flow. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement > >>> i.e., > >>> > > > > > so > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business > >>> entity. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind > of > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to > >>> current > >>> > > > implementation) : > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods > exchange > >>> but > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > there > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and > >>> > > > > > receiver > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > as > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > they > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. > >>> So > >>> > > > business > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any > sales > >>> or > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > purchase > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any > >>> real > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > time > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > payment > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its > >>> > > > > > applicability > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > country/state-specific > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > tax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations. For example: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state > >>> > > > > > might be > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed > at > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > different rate in > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR > >>> tax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations can > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently > >>> intra-company > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > goods transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > are even taxable or not) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods > >>> > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > now > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability > >>> and in > >>> > > > > > this > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to be > >>> > > > > > issued > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > along > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document > >>> (depending on > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > the inter-state > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is > >>> having > >>> > > > > > single > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches > >>> with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs > >>> to be > >>> > > > issue. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the > >>> goods. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is > >>> having > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > different > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches > >>> with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate > >>> “Tax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Invoice†* > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid > to > >>> > > > > > the > >>> > > > state > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated > in > >>> > > > > > this > >>> > > > case. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status > >>> > > > > > transitioning > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ > >>> (from > >>> > > > > > originating > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > facility) à > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination > >>> facility). > >>> > > > > > As it needs to > >>> > > > be > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > tracked internally. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against > the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > transferred > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate > GL > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > accounts > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > per > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority > >>> (in > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > accordance > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > with business rules). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to > >>> systemically > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > build > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the > >>> > > > > > individual > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned > requests/requirement > >>> > > > > > for > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > common > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > implemented) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough > solution > >>> > > > > > that > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of > flexibility. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > >>> > > > > > <[hidden email]>] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as > >>> > > > > > mentioned > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > earlier > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is > >>> reasonable > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > since > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > we > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to > >>> > > > > > enable > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > shipment. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is > >>> > > > > > selected, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will > >>> be > >>> > > > created. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer > >>> SO & > >>> > PO. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes > can > >>> > > > > > only > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer > entities. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of > SO > >>> to > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain < > >>> [hidden email]> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in > Business > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Requirements > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > like: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than > one > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > product > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > in > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > any inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with > >>> > > > > > > Shipment > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > which is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > missing. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Accounting > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > which > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > is missing. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after > >>> GST) on > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > documentation. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, > driver) > >>> > > > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > respective transfer order. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to > >>> Order > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > "Transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". > >>> Business > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > does > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO > >>> > > > > > > should > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > be > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass > >>> the > >>> > > > > > > PO > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive > >>> product" > >>> > > > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow > of > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive > >>> Product" > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > workflow. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Yes James, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly > coupled > >>> > > > > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item > >>> > > > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to > maintain > >>> > > > > > > > data > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer > >>> with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> > > > > > > > records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, > e.g. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or > >>> common > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > info > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each > >>> InventoryTransfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > will > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Folks, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that > any > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is > >>> generally > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > for > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single > >>> > > > > > > > > shipment > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given > >>> inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and > hence > >>> > > > > > > > > only > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > one > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > product). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the > >>> > > > > > > > > existing > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be > tied > >>> > > > > > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with > it > >>> as > >>> > > > > > > > > well. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + Of > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail > >>> > > > etc. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business > >>> cases > >>> > > > > > > > > and > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > [hidden email]>] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to > >>> Inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Item > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Detail > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to > the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think? > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[hidden email] > > > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory > >>> Item > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > table? > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory > >>> item > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after > >>> completing > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store > >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory > >>> item. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't > get > >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper > history > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > maintenance > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > of records. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > -- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme > >>> no. > >>> > > > > > > > > > > 78, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> -- > >>> Pierre Smits > >>> > >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > >>> OFBiz based solutions & services > >>> > >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > >>> > >> > >> > > > |
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
|
|
In reply to this post by Pawan Verma
Hi all,
My vote is for Design Approach #1 Can consider having the additional modifications: 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory transfer with shipment. 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. Regards, James Yong On 2018/04/24 08:20:44, Pawan Verma <[hidden email]> wrote: > Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365< > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>. > > -- > Thanks and Regards, > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore, > M.P, India - 452010 > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement > > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We > > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task. > > > > -- > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > > Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma < > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > >> Hello All, > >> > >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs. > >> > >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket > >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task. > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks and Regards, > >> > >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > >> > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and > >>> protocols > >>> is a widely accepted solution. > >>> > >>> Best regards > >>> > >>> Pierre > >>> > >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. > >>> > > >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions. > >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow > >>> lead > >>> > to > >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference > >>> to use > >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the > >>> discussed > >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain > >>> and > >>> > most > >>> > > flexible way. > >>> > > > >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then > >>> let's > >>> > cut a > >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it. > >>> > > > >>> > > Thanks, > >>> > > Swapnil > >>> > > > >>> > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] > >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM > >>> > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > >>> > > Hi all, > >>> > > > >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or > >>> > without > >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory > >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and > >>> Purchase > >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand > >>> inventory > >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future. > >>> > > > >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. > >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment > >>> > > > >>> > > Regards, > >>> > > James Yong > >>> > > > >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment > >>> that > >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a > >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order > >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type > >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new > >>> Shipment > >>> > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs processed > >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment. > >>> > > > What it would mean is that: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating > >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination > >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From > >>> Vendor’ > >>> > and > >>> > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both > >>> originating > >>> > and > >>> > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company or > >>> > business > >>> > > > entity). > >>> > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items > >>> > (even > >>> > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). > >>> > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO > >>> in a > >>> > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. > >>> > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility > >>> then > >>> > move > >>> > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s > >>> status > >>> > can > >>> > > > also be > >>> > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the > >>> tune > >>> > of > >>> > > > shipped > >>> > > > units. > >>> > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against > >>> > linked > >>> > > > RO. > >>> > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the > >>> ‘Shipped’ RO > >>> > > > (similar to > >>> > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment > >>> that > >>> > was > >>> > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On > >>> hand to > >>> > > > the > >>> > > > tune of received units. > >>> > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the > >>> shipment > >>> > to > >>> > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also > >>> be > >>> > > > marked as > >>> > > > ‘Completed’. > >>> > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the > >>> > > > process > >>> > > > wherever needed. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against > >>> other > >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks > >>> over > >>> > > > complicated. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] > >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM > >>> > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Hello All, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data > >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for > >>> inventory > >>> > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO > >>> for > >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using > >>> sales/purchase > >>> > > > order. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while > >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of > >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that > >>> > > > order is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are > >>> same). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus > >>> > > > entity. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple > >>> products > >>> > > > at a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > time. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data > >>> model. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with > >>> > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thanks & Regards > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Hotwax Systems, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <[hidden email]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support > >>> > > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > transfer with shipment. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as > >>> > > > > discussed > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > earlier) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email] > >>> m> > >>> > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to > >>> stock > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > transfer flow. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement > >>> i.e., > >>> > > > > > so > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business > >>> entity. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to > >>> current > >>> > > > implementation) : > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange > >>> but > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > there > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and > >>> > > > > > receiver > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > as > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > they > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. > >>> So > >>> > > > business > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales > >>> or > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > purchase > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any > >>> real > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > time > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > payment > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its > >>> > > > > > applicability > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > country/state-specific > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > tax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations. For example: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain state > >>> > > > > > might be > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > different rate in > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR > >>> tax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations can > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently > >>> intra-company > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > goods transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > are even taxable or not) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods > >>> > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > now > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability > >>> and in > >>> > > > > > this > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to be > >>> > > > > > issued > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > along > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document > >>> (depending on > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > the inter-state > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is > >>> having > >>> > > > > > single > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches > >>> with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs > >>> to be > >>> > > > issue. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the > >>> goods. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is > >>> having > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > different > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving branches > >>> with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate > >>> “Tax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Invoice†* > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to > >>> > > > > > the > >>> > > > state > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in > >>> > > > > > this > >>> > > > case. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status > >>> > > > > > transitioning > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ > >>> (from > >>> > > > > > originating > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > facility) à > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination > >>> facility). > >>> > > > > > As it needs to > >>> > > > be > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > tracked internally. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > transferred > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > accounts > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > per > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax authority > >>> (in > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > accordance > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > with business rules). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to > >>> systemically > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > build > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the > >>> > > > > > individual > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement > >>> > > > > > for > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > common > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > implemented) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution > >>> > > > > > that > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > >>> > > > > > <[hidden email]>] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as > >>> > > > > > mentioned > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > earlier > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is > >>> reasonable > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > since > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > we > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to > >>> > > > > > enable > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > shipment. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is > >>> > > > > > selected, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will > >>> be > >>> > > > created. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer > >>> SO & > >>> > PO. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can > >>> > > > > > only > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO > >>> to > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain < > >>> [hidden email]> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Requirements > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > like: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > product > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > in > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > any inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with > >>> > > > > > > Shipment > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > which is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > missing. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Accounting > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > which > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > is missing. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after > >>> GST) on > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > documentation. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) > >>> > > > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > respective transfer order. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to > >>> Order > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > "Transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". > >>> Business > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > does > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO > >>> > > > > > > should > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > be > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass > >>> the > >>> > > > > > > PO > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive > >>> product" > >>> > > > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive > >>> Product" > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > workflow. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Yes James, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled > >>> > > > > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item > >>> > > > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain > >>> > > > > > > > data > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer > >>> with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> > > > > > > > records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or > >>> common > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > info > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each > >>> InventoryTransfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > will > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Folks, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is > >>> generally > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > for > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single > >>> > > > > > > > > shipment > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given > >>> inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence > >>> > > > > > > > > only > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > one > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > product). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the > >>> > > > > > > > > existing > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied > >>> > > > > > > > > with > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > a > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it > >>> as > >>> > > > > > > > > well. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + Of > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail > >>> > > > etc. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business > >>> cases > >>> > > > > > > > > and > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > [hidden email]>] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > >>> records > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to > >>> Inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Item > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Detail > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think? > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<[hidden email]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory > >>> Item > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > table? > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory > >>> item > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after > >>> completing > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > transfer. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store > >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory > >>> item. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get > >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > maintenance > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > of records. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > -- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, Scheme > >>> no. > >>> > > > > > > > > > > 78, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> -- > >>> Pierre Smits > >>> > >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > >>> OFBiz based solutions & services > >>> > >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > >>> > >> > >> > > > |
Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
|
|
My vote is for Approach#1.
Thanks & Regards -- Yashwant Dhakad HotWax Systems http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/ On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 9:55 PM, James Yong <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi all, > > My vote is for Design Approach #1 > > Can consider having the additional modifications: > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory > transfer with shipment. > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > > Regards, > James Yong > > On 2018/04/24 08:20:44, Pawan Verma <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365< > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>. > > > > -- > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > Indore, > > M.P, India - 452010 > > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma < > [hidden email]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this > improvement > > > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. > We > > > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task. > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > > > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > > > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > > > Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > > > Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma < > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > >> Hello All, > > >> > > >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs. > > >> > > >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the > ticket > > >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the > task. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Thanks and Regards, > > >> > > >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer > > >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems > > >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > > >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, > > >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010 > > >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687 > > >> > > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email] > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and > > >>> protocols > > >>> is a widely accepted solution. > > >>> > > >>> Best regards > > >>> > > >>> Pierre > > >>> > > >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity. > > >>> > > > >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <[hidden email]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions. > > >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering > flow > > >>> lead > > >>> > to > > >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong > preference > > >>> to use > > >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the > > >>> discussed > > >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to > maintain > > >>> and > > >>> > most > > >>> > > flexible way. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then > > >>> let's > > >>> > cut a > > >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Thanks, > > >>> > > Swapnil > > >>> > > > > >>> > > -----Original Message----- > > >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email]] > > >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM > > >>> > > To: [hidden email] > > >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > >>> records > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Hi all, > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches > (with or > > >>> > without > > >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for > inventory > > >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and > > >>> Purchase > > >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand > > >>> inventory > > >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference. > > >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Regards, > > >>> > > James Yong > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems. > com> > > >>> > wrote: > > >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single > shipment > > >>> that > > >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility > as a > > >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take > Order > > >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order > type > > >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new > > >>> Shipment > > >>> > > > Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And allow to have these ROs > processed > > >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment. > > >>> > > > What it would mean is that: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating > > >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination > > >>> > > > DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From > > >>> Vendor’ > > >>> > and > > >>> > > > ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both > > >>> originating > > >>> > and > > >>> > > > destination facilities are owned by same registered company > or > > >>> > business > > >>> > > > entity). > > >>> > > > 2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO > items > > >>> > (even > > >>> > > > if it means overriding existing reservations). > > >>> > > > 3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination > RO > > >>> in a > > >>> > > > single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking. > > >>> > > > 4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility > > >>> then > > >>> > move > > >>> > > > its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s > > >>> status > > >>> > can > > >>> > > > also be > > >>> > > > marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to > the > > >>> tune > > >>> > of > > >>> > > > shipped > > >>> > > > units. > > >>> > > > 5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) > against > > >>> > linked > > >>> > > > RO. > > >>> > > > 6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the > > >>> ‘Shipped’ RO > > >>> > > > (similar to > > >>> > > > PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer > Shipment > > >>> that > > >>> > was > > >>> > > > shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On > > >>> hand to > > >>> > > > the > > >>> > > > tune of received units. > > >>> > > > 7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the > > >>> shipment > > >>> > to > > >>> > > > ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can > also > > >>> be > > >>> > > > marked as > > >>> > > > ‘Completed’. > > >>> > > > 8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting > in the > > >>> > > > process > > >>> > > > wherever needed. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against > > >>> other > > >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks > > >>> over > > >>> > > > complicated. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Thanks, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Swapnil > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:[hidden email]] > > >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM > > >>> > > > To: [hidden email] > > >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > >>> records > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Hello All, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate > data > > >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for > > >>> inventory > > >>> > > > transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated > PO > > >>> for > > >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using > > >>> sales/purchase > > >>> > > > order. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while > > >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model > instead of > > >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify > that > > >>> > > > order is > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are > > >>> same). > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in > OrderStatus > > >>> > > > entity. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 4. Shipment is already associated with order data model. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple > > >>> products > > >>> > > > at a > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > time. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order > data > > >>> model. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > 8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock > transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > document(legal document vary according to country law) with > > >>> > > > inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Thanks & Regards > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > -- > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Hotwax Systems, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > [hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong < > [hidden email]> > > >>> > wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns > (i.e. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support > > >>> > > > > inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > transfer with shipment. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as > > >>> > > > > discussed > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > earlier) > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > James Yong > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah < > [hidden email] > > >>> m> > > >>> > > > > wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to > > >>> stock > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > transfer flow. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement > > >>> i.e., > > >>> > > > > > so > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business > > >>> entity. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any > kind of > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to > > >>> current > > >>> > > > implementation) : > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods > exchange > > >>> but > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > there > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > is > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > no real time money exchange involved between shipper and > > >>> > > > > > receiver > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > as > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > they > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > are both the very same business entity in the legal > sense. > > >>> So > > >>> > > > business > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > might not be necessarily interested in generating any > sales > > >>> or > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > purchase > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any > > >>> real > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > time > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > payment > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > or invoice settlement required at either end. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - In financial terms there are tax implications but its > > >>> > > > > > applicability > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > varies depending upon the laws of the land or > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > country/state-specific > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > tax > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations. For example: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - In US the very same item transferred in certain > state > > >>> > > > > > might be > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or > taxed at > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > different rate in > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > another (someone with better understanding of US or > EUR > > >>> tax > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations can > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > throw more light and let us know if currently > > >>> intra-company > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > goods transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > are even taxable or not) > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods > > >>> > > > > > transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > is > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > now > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > shifted on the supply of goods. As a result: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability > > >>> and in > > >>> > > > > > this > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > case, only a separate “Tax Invoice†* needs to > be > > >>> > > > > > issued > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > along > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > stock transfer note and supporting document > > >>> (depending on > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > the inter-state > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > regulations while crossing the state borders) > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is > > >>> having > > >>> > > > > > single > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving > branches > > >>> with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice > *needs > > >>> to be > > >>> > > > issue. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the > > >>> goods. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - For intra-state transfers if business entity is > > >>> having > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > different > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > registration for originating and receiving > branches > > >>> with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > is tax liability and in this case, only a separate > > >>> “Tax > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Invoice†* > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > needs to be issued along with stock transfer note. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be > paid to > > >>> > > > > > the > > >>> > > > state > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be > generated in > > >>> > > > > > this > > >>> > > > case. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status > > >>> > > > > > transitioning > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ > > >>> (from > > >>> > > > > > originating > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > facility) à > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination > > >>> facility). > > >>> > > > > > As it needs to > > >>> > > > be > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > tracked internally. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - The deemed transaction value and tax liability > against the > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > transferred > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > goods should hit the accounting books against > appropriate GL > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > accounts > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > per > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > store and a separate GL account against the tax > authority > > >>> (in > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > accordance > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > with business rules). > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > - Later at some point of time we may also like to > > >>> systemically > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > build > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > the > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the > > >>> > > > > > individual > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned > requests/requirement > > >>> > > > > > for > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > a > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > common > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > destination facility (i.e., once any feature like > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > implemented) > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough > solution > > >>> > > > > > that > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of > flexibility. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Swapnil > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > <[hidden email]>] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > >>> records > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as > > >>> > > > > > mentioned > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > earlier > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is > > >>> reasonable > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > since > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > we > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option > to > > >>> > > > > > enable > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > shipment. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is > > >>> > > > > > selected, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) > will > > >>> be > > >>> > > > created. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these > transfer > > >>> SO & > > >>> > PO. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. > Changes can > > >>> > > > > > only > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer > entities. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function > of SO > > >>> to > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > James Yong > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain < > > >>> [hidden email]> > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in > Business > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Requirements > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > like: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more > than one > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > product > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > in > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > any inventory transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 2. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > >>> > > > > > > Shipment > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > which is > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > missing. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 3. Inventory transfer should have an association with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Accounting > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > which > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > is missing. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after > > >>> GST) on > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock > transferring" > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > documentation. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 6. Tracking of Transferred inventory. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > 7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, > driver) > > >>> > > > > > > with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > the > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > respective transfer order. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to > > >>> Order > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create > a > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > "Transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". > > >>> Business > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > does > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. > PO > > >>> > > > > > > should > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > be > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to > surpass > > >>> the > > >>> > > > > > > PO > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive > > >>> product" > > >>> > > > > > > is > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a > flow of > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive > > >>> Product" > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > workflow. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah < > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Yes James, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly > coupled > > >>> > > > > > > > with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item > > >>> > > > > > > > transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to > maintain > > >>> > > > > > > > data > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer > > >>> with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory > transfer > > >>> > > > > > > > records > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, > e.g. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or > > >>> common > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > info > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each > > >>> InventoryTransfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > will > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > James Yong > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Folks, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that > any > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is > > >>> generally > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > for > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single > > >>> > > > > > > > > shipment > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given > > >>> inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and > hence > > >>> > > > > > > > > only > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > one > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > product). > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the > > >>> > > > > > > > > existing > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be > tied > > >>> > > > > > > > > with > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > a > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up > with it > > >>> as > > >>> > > > > > > > > well. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > + Of > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via > > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail > > >>> > > > etc. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business > > >>> cases > > >>> > > > > > > > > and > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic > enough. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:[hidden email] < > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > [hidden email]>] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer > > >>> records > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to > > >>> Inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Item > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Detail > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to > the > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"< > [hidden email]> > > >>> > wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at > Inventory > > >>> Item > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > table? > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > <[hidden email]> > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new > inventory > > >>> item > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after > > >>> completing > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > transfer. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity > and > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory > > >>> item. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't > get > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper > history > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > maintenance > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > of records. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software > Engineer > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *HotWax > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Commerce* by *HotWax Systems* Plot no. 80, > Scheme > > >>> no. > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > 78, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010 > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> -- > > >>> Pierre Smits > > >>> > > >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > > >>> OFBiz based solutions & services > > >>> > > >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > > >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > |
«
Return to OFBiz - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |