Re: Cost Centers Accounts Screen re commit r1344568

[Pierre Smits]

Jacopo,

Almost a month ago you asked for use cases regarding the pros and cons of
the implemented change as with commit
r1344568
on cost center screens and forms by vikas in order to be able take a more
informed decision.

Can you inform us if now a decision has been taken and what the outcome was?

Pierre

2012/6/2 Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>

> While Vikas does a great job explaining why there is a need for cost
> centers, he doesn't address the issue of why the change should be
> implemented.
>
> Before the commit following functionalities were available:
>
>    1. Create cost centers<https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/FindGlAccountCategory>
>    2. Get per cost center an overview of related GL Accounts and add new
>    ones<https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/EditGlAccountCategoryMember?glAccountCategoryId=9301>
>    3. Have one entry form where the administrator of a company,
>    subsidiary or department could add, edit and delete associated GL for all
>    cost centers available based on all GL Accounts available to said entity.
>    Having this form the administrator only had to enter a percentage number
>    for the appropriate cost center and when clicking the submit button the
>    association (or mapping) between cost center and GL Account was created or
>    modified.
>
> After the commit the functionality of item 3 is reduced to only showing
> the accounts for which a mapping has been created. If an administrator
> needs to add a new mapping he/she than has to go to functionality 2 to
> create it, and repeat that step over and over until all associations are
> created.
>
> In a sense this reduction of functionality means a reduction of user
> experience. Having been a financial controller for many years in various
> SMEs and having worked with all kinds of administrators I know that ease of
> use of functionalities is something that is always highly appreciated.
>
> If Vikas wanted to provide an overview of only associated GL Accounts to
> all cost centers, he should have added a new
> functionality in stead of diminishing the existing one. Actually, having
> one that is read-only (and/or exportable/printable) would make sense.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
>
> 2012/6/1 Vikas Mayur <[hidden email]>
>
>> Pierre, I really don't know whether it was intentional to show all the
>> accounts of the organization because I don't see any such discussion in the
>> past except couple of jira issues. Perhaps the author of the code could
>> throw some light.
>>
>> Jacopo, I support the idea of just showing only the accounts related to
>> the cost centers based on the following use case / theory. Let me know if
>> you think otherwise.
>>
>> Cost centers are part of the organization (could be division/department)
>> which adds to the cost of an organization. Lets say the organization have
>> three divisions namely Sales & Marketing, Customer Service & Operations
>> where each division have a certain number of employees for its operation.
>> Suppose, the organization gives health insurance to each employee which is
>> an expense account. To know the cost (% of total expense) of health
>> insurance by each division, the organization will setup three cost centers,
>> one for each division. This would basically means that the health insurance
>> account is now also associated to each cost center with an amount
>> percentage of the total expense. There could be other accounts where the
>> organization would like to know the expenses by each division / cost center
>> and such accounts can also be associated to these cost centers.
>>
>> Now, if there are any other accounts since all the accounts won't be just
>> for expenses then why we would be needing those accounts on cost center?
>> If, the organization need some of them at some point of time they can be
>> added to cost centers in similar manner.
>>
>> PS - I don't find any other way to know whether the cost center belongs
>> to parent organization or any other internal organization except by looking
>> at the gl account(s) of the organization which is/are associated to the
>> cost centers via GlAccountCategoryMember entity. I believe we just setup
>> cost centers through GlAccountCategory (with type COST CENTER) and the gl
>> accounts associated to cost centers will denote which organization(s) are
>> related to the cost centers. We perhaps need to simplify the service that
>> generates the data for cost centers screen, it contains lot of iteration
>> code to build a data in such a simple form.
>>
>> Regards
>> Vikas
>>
>> On May 31, 2012, at 7:46 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>
>> > Vikas, Pierre,
>> >
>> > it would be useful if you both could provide a simple use case of the
>> screen to highlight why you think it should work in that way; then we could
>> take a more informed decision.
>> >
>> > Jacopo
>> >
>> > On May 31, 2012, at 10:05 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>> >
>> >> Please don't.
>> >>
>> >> Showing all accounts of the parent organisations was intentional, so
>> >> changes could be effected in one overview/screen/form.
>> >>
>> >> 2012/5/29 Vikas Mayur <[hidden email]>
>> >>
>> >>> Ok, I'll work on a fix since all the gl accounts assigned to the
>> parent
>> >>> organization 'Company' are showing up in the cost centers screen
>> while the
>> >>> only accounts associated to cost centers should show up.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks
>> >>> Vikas
>> >>>
>> >>> On May 29, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Vikas,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> New cost centers can be added through the 'GL Account Category' menu
>> >>> item.
>> >>>> See:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/FindGlAccountCategory
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If you then go to 'Cost Centers', you'll see newly added cost
>> centers (if
>> >>>> any), plus an overview of all assigned gl accounts. As a means to
>> easily
>> >>>> manage percentual aspects of costs related to cost centers. As such
>> it
>> >>>> makes sense.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If you want an overview per cost center, you'll have to go back to
>> the
>> >>> 'GL
>> >>>> Account Category' menu item, select the cost center of choice and go
>> to
>> >>> the
>> >>>> 'GL Account Category Member' overview. See:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> vhttps://
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/EditGlAccountCategoryMember?glAccountCategoryId=9301
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Regards,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Pierre
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 2012/5/29 Vikas Mayur <[hidden email]>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> In OFBiz demo data there are three cost centers namely cost center
>> 1, 2
>> >>> &
>> >>>>> 3. The GlAccountCategoryMember associate GL Accounts to a particular
>> >>> cost
>> >>>>> center. At the moment only three GL Accounts are added to these cost
>> >>>>> centers. When you go to Accounting > Global Gl Settings > Cost
>> Centers
>> >>>>> screen it shows all the accounts that are related to the
>> organization
>> >>> party
>> >>>>> Id while it should only show the accounts related to cost centers?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Regards
>> >>>>> Vikas
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

What I wanted to say when I wrote "we could take a more informed decision" is that the community (including Vikas and you) could take a better decision, not that the OFBiz PMC was going to discuss this privately (we never do code level discussion in the private list).
Please solicit a reply from Vikas rather than me.

Jacopo

On Jun 30, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:

> Jacopo,
>
> Almost a month ago you asked for use cases regarding the pros and cons of
> the implemented change as with commit
> r1344568
> on cost center screens and forms by vikas in order to be able take a more
> informed decision.
>
> Can you inform us if now a decision has been taken and what the outcome was?
>
> Pierre
>
> 2012/6/2 Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
>
>> While Vikas does a great job explaining why there is a need for cost
>> centers, he doesn't address the issue of why the change should be
>> implemented.
>>
>> Before the commit following functionalities were available:
>>
>>   1. Create cost centers<https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/FindGlAccountCategory>
>>   2. Get per cost center an overview of related GL Accounts and add new
>>   ones<https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/EditGlAccountCategoryMember?glAccountCategoryId=9301>
>>   3. Have one entry form where the administrator of a company,
>>   subsidiary or department could add, edit and delete associated GL for all
>>   cost centers available based on all GL Accounts available to said entity.
>>   Having this form the administrator only had to enter a percentage number
>>   for the appropriate cost center and when clicking the submit button the
>>   association (or mapping) between cost center and GL Account was created or
>>   modified.
>>
>> After the commit the functionality of item 3 is reduced to only showing
>> the accounts for which a mapping has been created. If an administrator
>> needs to add a new mapping he/she than has to go to functionality 2 to
>> create it, and repeat that step over and over until all associations are
>> created.
>>
>> In a sense this reduction of functionality means a reduction of user
>> experience. Having been a financial controller for many years in various
>> SMEs and having worked with all kinds of administrators I know that ease of
>> use of functionalities is something that is always highly appreciated.
>>
>> If Vikas wanted to provide an overview of only associated GL Accounts to
>> all cost centers, he should have added a new
>> functionality in stead of diminishing the existing one. Actually, having
>> one that is read-only (and/or exportable/printable) would make sense.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>>
>> 2012/6/1 Vikas Mayur <[hidden email]>
>>
>>> Pierre, I really don't know whether it was intentional to show all the
>>> accounts of the organization because I don't see any such discussion in the
>>> past except couple of jira issues. Perhaps the author of the code could
>>> throw some light.
>>>
>>> Jacopo, I support the idea of just showing only the accounts related to
>>> the cost centers based on the following use case / theory. Let me know if
>>> you think otherwise.
>>>
>>> Cost centers are part of the organization (could be division/department)
>>> which adds to the cost of an organization. Lets say the organization have
>>> three divisions namely Sales & Marketing, Customer Service & Operations
>>> where each division have a certain number of employees for its operation.
>>> Suppose, the organization gives health insurance to each employee which is
>>> an expense account. To know the cost (% of total expense) of health
>>> insurance by each division, the organization will setup three cost centers,
>>> one for each division. This would basically means that the health insurance
>>> account is now also associated to each cost center with an amount
>>> percentage of the total expense. There could be other accounts where the
>>> organization would like to know the expenses by each division / cost center
>>> and such accounts can also be associated to these cost centers.
>>>
>>> Now, if there are any other accounts since all the accounts won't be just
>>> for expenses then why we would be needing those accounts on cost center?
>>> If, the organization need some of them at some point of time they can be
>>> added to cost centers in similar manner.
>>>
>>> PS - I don't find any other way to know whether the cost center belongs
>>> to parent organization or any other internal organization except by looking
>>> at the gl account(s) of the organization which is/are associated to the
>>> cost centers via GlAccountCategoryMember entity. I believe we just setup
>>> cost centers through GlAccountCategory (with type COST CENTER) and the gl
>>> accounts associated to cost centers will denote which organization(s) are
>>> related to the cost centers. We perhaps need to simplify the service that
>>> generates the data for cost centers screen, it contains lot of iteration
>>> code to build a data in such a simple form.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Vikas
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2012, at 7:46 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vikas, Pierre,
>>>>
>>>> it would be useful if you both could provide a simple use case of the
>>> screen to highlight why you think it should work in that way; then we could
>>> take a more informed decision.
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>> On May 31, 2012, at 10:05 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Please don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Showing all accounts of the parent organisations was intentional, so
>>>>> changes could be effected in one overview/screen/form.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/5/29 Vikas Mayur <[hidden email]>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I'll work on a fix since all the gl accounts assigned to the
>>> parent
>>>>>> organization 'Company' are showing up in the cost centers screen
>>> while the
>>>>>> only accounts associated to cost centers should show up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Vikas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 29, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Vikas,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> New cost centers can be added through the 'GL Account Category' menu
>>>>>> item.
>>>>>>> See:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/FindGlAccountCategory
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you then go to 'Cost Centers', you'll see newly added cost
>>> centers (if
>>>>>>> any), plus an overview of all assigned gl accounts. As a means to
>>> easily
>>>>>>> manage percentual aspects of costs related to cost centers. As such
>>> it
>>>>>>> makes sense.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you want an overview per cost center, you'll have to go back to
>>> the
>>>>>> 'GL
>>>>>>> Account Category' menu item, select the cost center of choice and go
>>> to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> 'GL Account Category Member' overview. See:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> vhttps://
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org:8443/accounting/control/EditGlAccountCategoryMember?glAccountCategoryId=9301
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2012/5/29 Vikas Mayur <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In OFBiz demo data there are three cost centers namely cost center
>>> 1, 2
>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>> 3. The GlAccountCategoryMember associate GL Accounts to a particular
>>>>>> cost
>>>>>>>> center. At the moment only three GL Accounts are added to these cost
>>>>>>>> centers. When you go to Accounting > Global Gl Settings > Cost
>>> Centers
>>>>>>>> screen it shows all the accounts that are related to the
>>> organization
>>>>>> party
>>>>>>>> Id while it should only show the accounts related to cost centers?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Vikas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

[Pierre Smits]

Jacopo,

Thanks for your explanation.

So, given that no one else has said to be in favor of the change and that
this is also governed by Apache procedures (although it hadn't been put up
for voiting explicitly), this change should have been reverted.

Pierre



2012/7/1 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>

> What I wanted to say when I wrote "we could take a more informed decision"
> is that the community (including Vikas and you) could take a better
> decision, not that the OFBiz PMC was going to discuss this privately (we
> never do code level discussion in the private list).
> Please solicit a reply from Vikas rather than me.
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

On Jul 9, 2012, at 8:32 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:

> So, given that no one else has said to be in favor of the change and that
> this is also governed by Apache procedures (although it hadn't been put up
> for voiting explicitly), this change should have been reverted.

?

Jacopo

[Pierre Smits]

You should have it reverted!

2012/7/9 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>

>
> On Jul 9, 2012, at 8:32 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
> > So, given that no one else has said to be in favor of the change and that
> > this is also governed by Apache procedures (although it hadn't been put
> up
> > for voiting explicitly), this change should have been reverted.
>
> ?
>
> Jacopo
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

You do not understand the rules

Jacopo

On Jul 9, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:

> You should have it reverted!
>
> 2012/7/9 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>
>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2012, at 8:32 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>
>>> So, given that no one else has said to be in favor of the change and that
>>> this is also governed by Apache procedures (although it hadn't been put
>> up
>>> for voiting explicitly), this change should have been reverted.
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>

[Pierre Smits]

Why don't you explain them to all of us. Especially where the Apache rules
and guidelines state that the meritocratic system doesn't apply when one
community member objects to implemented changes (as a so called
improvement)  by another community member and no one else of the community
is in favor of the implementation.



2012/7/9 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>

> You do not understand the rules
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Jul 9, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
> > You should have it reverted!
> >
> > 2012/7/9 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>
> >
> >>
> >> On Jul 9, 2012, at 8:32 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>
> >>> So, given that no one else has said to be in favor of the change and
> that
> >>> this is also governed by Apache procedures (although it hadn't been put
> >> up
> >>> for voiting explicitly), this change should have been reverted.
> >>
> >> ?
> >>
> >> Jacopo
> >>
> >>
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

:-)

On Jul 9, 2012, at 3:28 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:

> Why don't you explain them to all of us. Especially where the Apache rules
> and guidelines state that the meritocratic system doesn't apply when one
> community member objects to implemented changes (as a so called
> improvement)  by another community member and no one else of the community
> is in favor of the implementation.
>
>
>
> 2012/7/9 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>
>
>> You do not understand the rules
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>
>>> You should have it reverted!
>>>
>>> 2012/7/9 Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 9, 2012, at 8:32 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So, given that no one else has said to be in favor of the change and
>> that
>>>>> this is also governed by Apache procedures (although it hadn't been put
>>>> up
>>>>> for voiting explicitly), this change should have been reverted.
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>