From: Phil D. <ph...@lo...> - 2013-12-10 09:37:37
|
I agree with Tim too on this. I am not sure I want more complexity around the user definition unless we have a very clear idea about why. Phil Phil Daintree Logic Works Ltd - +64 (0)275 567890 http://www.logicworks.co.nz On 10/12/13 16:58, ExsonQu wrote: > *Dear all:* > > Thank you for your opinion! I've quoted Tim's as followed. > > Although there is different opinion, I think there is one which is > agreed by most of us: > We should create a uniform approval(request/confirm) regular for > those business processes. > Although Tim think current tokens system is powerful enough, I still > have to face the request/approval problem. For instance, we have 20 sales > men and they belong to 5 different groups, and each group have one team > leader. And all those teams are under an sales manager. When they issue SO > which is zero cost or price is lower than the normal one, it's must be > approved by team lead or manager. And sometime it's should be approved by > general manager. > > Even we can use tokens to control the scripts, at last, we still > have to know which group those sales belong to, and what responsibility of > each of those users. So we have to store and retrieve those information in > some place. > > My suggest is to create a table which named organization? It > contains fields as business_type which defined the processes involved, > userid, superior(user's head), submeber(user's subordinate). It's more like > a structure of current BOM. Then we can define each user's business role in > the organization. We can assign those users to different responsibility > according to their position in the business type. > > Thank you for your great idea. And looking forwarding to more from > all of you. > > Best regards! > > Exson > > > > > I think its possible to over complicate this issue, we already have a > complex and flexible security model. > > It is possible to have a per user security system by just creating a > separate role per user. Maybe a "duplicate this role" option? > > Most things have an inquiry as well as an input screen, so there are > not many occasions where the read/write becomes an issue. There are a > few fields that would be nice to have that option on, not sure if its > worth the extra work? > > Just my couple of pennies :-) > > Tim > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://weberp-accounting.1478800.n4.nabble.com/Shall-we-find-a-another-regular-way-to-manage-authority-tp4657044p4657065.html > Sent from the web-ERP-developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK > Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. > Download it for free now! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Web-erp-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers > |