orderSkipInvoice, complete an order without generating an invoice

[Antoine Ouvrard]

Hello,

I would like to introduce you a improvement.

In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
example.

But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
invoice generation.

Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241

Antoine

[taher]

Hi Antoine,

Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
I have a few comments / questions:

- First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
(probably by mistake?).
- perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
requirement?
- Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
workflow instead?

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I would like to introduce you a improvement.
>
> In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
> example.
>
> But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
> invoice generation.
>
> Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
>
> Antoine

[Rishi Solanki]

Antoine,

In general I observe that for a party business may want to send invoice at
the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay to generate the
invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices once.

Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use invoice
status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some user come and
approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use etc.

So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz offers, you
can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no custom changes.



Rishi Solanki
Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: [phone]
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> Hi Antoine,
>
> Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
> I have a few comments / questions:
>
> - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
> (probably by mistake?).
> - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
> introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
> requirement?
> - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
> workflow instead?
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to introduce you a improvement.
> >
> > In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
> > example.
> >
> > But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
> > invoice generation.
> >
> > Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
> >
> > Antoine
>

[Suraj Khurana]

+1 Rishi.
I agree to you.

--
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
Cell phone: [phone]

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Rishi Solanki <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Antoine,
>
> In general I observe that for a party business may want to send invoice at
> the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay to generate the
> invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices once.
>
> Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use invoice
> status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some user come and
> approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use etc.
>
> So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz offers, you
> can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no custom changes.
>
>
>
> Rishi Solanki
> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> Direct: [phone]
> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
> www.hotwax.co
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <
> [hidden email]
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Antoine,
> >
> > Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
> > I have a few comments / questions:
> >
> > - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
> > (probably by mistake?).
> > - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
> > introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
> > requirement?
> > - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
> > workflow instead?
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I would like to introduce you a improvement.
> > >
> > > In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
> > > example.
> > >
> > > But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
> > > invoice generation.
> > >
> > > Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
> > >
> > > Antoine
> >
>

[Nicolas Malin-2]

Hi Rishi

On 26/02/2018 15:11, Rishi Solanki wrote:
> Antoine,
>
> In general I observe that for a party business may want to send invoice at
> the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay to generate the
> invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices once.
>
> Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use invoice
> status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some user come and
It's a little more complicated from own different business context. In
Europe the generate invoice date it's really important for payment term
and order sequence of invoice ids. Theses problematic exclude all ideas
to pre generate invoice  before sent it.

Currently on the standard we have only the possibility to say for an
order that we bill it when a shipment is completed or the order is
completed. But we can't stop the invoice generation.

And to complicate the picture we have some site with billing agreement
where some order can bill at the shipment, some other at the end of
month and some other related to the incoterm. It's really a pain :)

I already exchanged with Antoine with the first implementation, because
we implement this quickly. I'm not in favor to invoicePerOrder and also
to remove invoicePerShipment to replace them by an enumeration on the
ProductStore and the OrderHeader like
productStore.billingOrderProcessEnumId and
orderHeader.billingOrderProcessEnumId clearly identify where we can
implement on standard and offer the possibility to define more for
custom billing process.

With this we can define how a product store manage them orders and if
necessary we can manage some exception by order.

Cheers,
Nicolas

> approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use etc.
>
> So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz offers, you
> can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no custom changes.
>
>
>
> Rishi Solanki
> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> Direct: [phone]
> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
> www.hotwax.co
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <[hidden email]
>> wrote:
>> Hi Antoine,
>>
>> Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
>> I have a few comments / questions:
>>
>> - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
>> (probably by mistake?).
>> - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
>> introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
>> requirement?
>> - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
>> workflow instead?
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I would like to introduce you a improvement.
>>>
>>> In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
>>> example.
>>>
>>> But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
>>> invoice generation.
>>>
>>> Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
>>>
>>> Antoine

[Rishi Solanki]

Nicolas,

Thank you for the detailed information. I agree on setting the trigger
value on on store level so that each store may behaves as per business
need, in case of multiple stores. Just one question here, orderHeader will
also have the same field or it is intended to override some default
behavior of store level setting.

Could you please help us here bit more, when you get chance. Thanks!


Best Regards,


Rishi Solanki
Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: [phone]
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Rishi
>
> On 26/02/2018 15:11, Rishi Solanki wrote:
>
>> Antoine,
>>
>> In general I observe that for a party business may want to send invoice at
>> the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay to generate the
>> invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices once.
>>
>> Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use invoice
>> status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some user come and
>>
> It's a little more complicated from own different business context. In
> Europe the generate invoice date it's really important for payment term and
> order sequence of invoice ids. Theses problematic exclude all ideas to pre
> generate invoice  before sent it.
>
> Currently on the standard we have only the possibility to say for an order
> that we bill it when a shipment is completed or the order is completed. But
> we can't stop the invoice generation.
>
> And to complicate the picture we have some site with billing agreement
> where some order can bill at the shipment, some other at the end of month
> and some other related to the incoterm. It's really a pain :)
>
> I already exchanged with Antoine with the first implementation, because we
> implement this quickly. I'm not in favor to invoicePerOrder and also to
> remove invoicePerShipment to replace them by an enumeration on the
> ProductStore and the OrderHeader like productStore.billingOrderProcessEnumId
> and orderHeader.billingOrderProcessEnumId clearly identify where we can
> implement on standard and offer the possibility to define more for custom
> billing process.
>
> With this we can define how a product store manage them orders and if
> necessary we can manage some exception by order.
>
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
>
>
> approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use etc.
>>
>> So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz offers, you
>> can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no custom changes.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rishi Solanki
>> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
>> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
>> Direct: [phone]
>> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
>> www.hotwax.co
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>> wrote:
>>> Hi Antoine,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
>>> I have a few comments / questions:
>>>
>>> - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
>>> (probably by mistake?).
>>> - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
>>> introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
>>> requirement?
>>> - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
>>> workflow instead?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to introduce you a improvement.
>>>>
>>>> In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
>>>> example.
>>>>
>>>> But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
>>>> invoice generation.
>>>>
>>>> Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
>>>>
>>>> Antoine
>>>>
>>>
>

[Nicolas Malin-2]

Hello Rishi

On 28/02/2018 11:43, Rishi Solanki wrote:
> Nicolas,
>
> Thank you for the detailed information. I agree on setting the trigger
> value on on store level so that each store may behaves as per business
> need, in case of multiple stores. Just one question here, orderHeader will
> also have the same field or it is intended to override some default
> behavior of store level setting.
Yes, set the same field on the orderHeader would be increase the
granularity rule.
By default your store generate an invoice for each shipment but for a
"specific big customer" you bill these orders by one invoice by month.
With a surcharge on the order you can implement a seca on your plugin to
analyze the customer when you create an order and change the billing
process value for this order.

I exchanged also with Pierre Gaudin, he has been implemented for a
customer a process to generate a invoice per month on some specific
case, we will see if we can adapt this with enumeration idea.
If you are agree I propose to try a POC with 4 cases :
  * bill on shipment
  * bill on order completed
  * bill on demand
  * no billed

Thanks Rishi for your look
Cheers,
Nicolas

>
> Could you please help us here bit more, when you get chance. Thanks!
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
> Rishi Solanki
> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> Direct: [phone]
> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
> www.hotwax.co
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Rishi
>>
>> On 26/02/2018 15:11, Rishi Solanki wrote:
>>
>>> Antoine,
>>>
>>> In general I observe that for a party business may want to send invoice at
>>> the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay to generate the
>>> invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices once.
>>>
>>> Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use invoice
>>> status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some user come and
>>>
>> It's a little more complicated from own different business context. In
>> Europe the generate invoice date it's really important for payment term and
>> order sequence of invoice ids. Theses problematic exclude all ideas to pre
>> generate invoice  before sent it.
>>
>> Currently on the standard we have only the possibility to say for an order
>> that we bill it when a shipment is completed or the order is completed. But
>> we can't stop the invoice generation.
>>
>> And to complicate the picture we have some site with billing agreement
>> where some order can bill at the shipment, some other at the end of month
>> and some other related to the incoterm. It's really a pain :)
>>
>> I already exchanged with Antoine with the first implementation, because we
>> implement this quickly. I'm not in favor to invoicePerOrder and also to
>> remove invoicePerShipment to replace them by an enumeration on the
>> ProductStore and the OrderHeader like productStore.billingOrderProcessEnumId
>> and orderHeader.billingOrderProcessEnumId clearly identify where we can
>> implement on standard and offer the possibility to define more for custom
>> billing process.
>>
>> With this we can define how a product store manage them orders and if
>> necessary we can manage some exception by order.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>> approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use etc.
>>> So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz offers, you
>>> can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no custom changes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rishi Solanki
>>> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
>>> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
>>> Direct: [phone]
>>> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
>>> www.hotwax.co
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Antoine,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
>>>> I have a few comments / questions:
>>>>
>>>> - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
>>>> (probably by mistake?).
>>>> - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
>>>> introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
>>>> requirement?
>>>> - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
>>>> workflow instead?
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to introduce you a improvement.
>>>>>
>>>>> In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
>>>>> example.
>>>>>
>>>>> But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
>>>>> invoice generation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
>>>>>
>>>>> Antoine
>>>>>

[Antoine Ouvrard]

Hi Taher and everyone,

Thank for your feedback, and I'm very sorry (and I'm little ashamed) to
have generated a patch with postgres config.

So bad!:)

I will rework this approvement  with Enumeration mechanism (thank
Nicolas).
And I hope to offer you a more flexible solution.

See you soon!

Antoine

On 2018/02/26 14:11:01, Rishi Solanki <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Antoine,>
>
> In general I observe that for a party business may want to send
> invoice at> the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay
> to generate
> the> invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices
> the> once.>
>
> Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use
> invoice> status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some
> invoice> user come and>
> approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use
> etc.>
>
> So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz
> offers, you> can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no
> custom changes.>
>
>
>
> Rishi Solanki>
> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development>
> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.>
> Direct: [phone]>
> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com>
> www.hotwax.co>
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb
> <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:>
>
> > Hi Antoine,>
> >>
> > Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more
> > often.> I have a few comments / questions:>
> >>
> > - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file>
> > (probably by mistake?).>
> > - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to>
> > introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom>
> > requirement?>
> > - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different
> > status> workflow instead?>
> >>
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard>
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:>
> > > Hello,>
> > >>
> > > I would like to introduce you a improvement.>
> > >>
> > > In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month
> > > for> example.>
> > >>
> > > But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the>
> > > invoice generation.>
> > >>
> > > Here's my proposal
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241>
> > >>
> > > Antoine>
> >>
>

[Rishi Solanki]

Nicolas,

I have some concerns like how to override the enumeration at order level
and overriding it at order level is okay, may be people from community
advise here.

But yes a POC would be of help to understand the exact use cases, which may
clear my most concerns. Please consider one suggestion to keep the existing
flow as is with the demo data, so that default OFBiz behaves as is.

Thanks!

--
Rishi Solanki
Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: [phone]
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hello Rishi
>
> On 28/02/2018 11:43, Rishi Solanki wrote:
>
>> Nicolas,
>>
>> Thank you for the detailed information. I agree on setting the trigger
>> value on on store level so that each store may behaves as per business
>> need, in case of multiple stores. Just one question here, orderHeader will
>> also have the same field or it is intended to override some default
>> behavior of store level setting.
>>
> Yes, set the same field on the orderHeader would be increase the
> granularity rule.
> By default your store generate an invoice for each shipment but for a
> "specific big customer" you bill these orders by one invoice by month.
> With a surcharge on the order you can implement a seca on your plugin to
> analyze the customer when you create an order and change the billing
> process value for this order.
>
> I exchanged also with Pierre Gaudin, he has been implemented for a
> customer a process to generate a invoice per month on some specific case,
> we will see if we can adapt this with enumeration idea.
> If you are agree I propose to try a POC with 4 cases :
>  * bill on shipment
>  * bill on order completed
>  * bill on demand
>  * no billed
>
> Thanks Rishi for your look
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
>
>
>> Could you please help us here bit more, when you get chance. Thanks!
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>>
>> Rishi Solanki
>> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
>> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
>> Direct: [phone]
>> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
>> www.hotwax.co
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rishi
>>>
>>> On 26/02/2018 15:11, Rishi Solanki wrote:
>>>
>>> Antoine,
>>>>
>>>> In general I observe that for a party business may want to send invoice
>>>> at
>>>> the end of month. But for that as well I think its okay to generate the
>>>> invoice at the time of order completion and send all invoices once.
>>>>
>>>> Also what Taher suggested looks promising to me. That means use invoice
>>>> status, lets say all invoices in Pending status until some user come and
>>>>
>>>> It's a little more complicated from own different business context. In
>>> Europe the generate invoice date it's really important for payment term
>>> and
>>> order sequence of invoice ids. Theses problematic exclude all ideas to
>>> pre
>>> generate invoice  before sent it.
>>>
>>> Currently on the standard we have only the possibility to say for an
>>> order
>>> that we bill it when a shipment is completed or the order is completed.
>>> But
>>> we can't stop the invoice generation.
>>>
>>> And to complicate the picture we have some site with billing agreement
>>> where some order can bill at the shipment, some other at the end of month
>>> and some other related to the incoterm. It's really a pain :)
>>>
>>> I already exchanged with Antoine with the first implementation, because
>>> we
>>> implement this quickly. I'm not in favor to invoicePerOrder and also to
>>> remove invoicePerShipment to replace them by an enumeration on the
>>> ProductStore and the OrderHeader like productStore.billingOrderProce
>>> ssEnumId
>>> and orderHeader.billingOrderProcessEnumId clearly identify where we can
>>> implement on standard and offer the possibility to define more for custom
>>> billing process.
>>>
>>> With this we can define how a product store manage them orders and if
>>> necessary we can manage some exception by order.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>>
>>> approve it. Then use statuses to consider invoices for business use etc.
>>>
>>>> So I think what you expect for your requirement actually OFBiz offers,
>>>> you
>>>> can use the status workflow for that. Most probably no custom changes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rishi Solanki
>>>> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
>>>> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
>>>> Direct: [phone]
>>>> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
>>>> www.hotwax.co
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Antoine,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your work and I hope we get to work with you more often.
>>>>> I have a few comments / questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> - First of all, you added a postgres dependency to the build file
>>>>> (probably by mistake?).
>>>>> - perhaps others can pitch in but I'm not sure if it is useful to
>>>>> introduce? Is this a common need or more of a specific custom
>>>>> requirement?
>>>>> - Also, why an indicator? Why not for example just a different status
>>>>> workflow instead?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Antoine Ouvrard
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to introduce you a improvement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In some case, we need to delay billing at the end of the month for
>>>>>> example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But to complete the order we need to disable triggering the
>>>>>> invoice generation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's my proposal https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10241
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Antoine
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>