From: Jesse P. <jes...@st...> - 2004-05-22 19:27:52
|
It sounds like we're back at the time I picked up WebERP except that it = actually had some beginnings of Serialised support. I will have to look = at how much it has changed since it sounds like you've taken my changes = and basically rewritten them to better suit your views without much = change in functionality before I can levy an opinion on it. Is this all = in current CVS? Remember that I was originially trying to give you a preview of where I = was going with my work - it was not and is not a finished piece. The = abstractions were done to simplify perusing the code in the various = files and breakout functional pieces - I believe I mentioned that I = found it quite cumbersome to wade through all the code, especially as = horribly important code became intermingled with, say, HTML sections. = They also were not completed. I have to say that Dick made some quite valid points. I don't know PEAR, = but following some recognized standard may help in readability. I think = the problem arising between your and my coding is not something PEAR = covers - it's more of a 'coding philosophy' thing, with my approach = being mostly backed by recent computer science training. To that end, = and in trying to not completely overwhelm you with changes, much of what = I did was intended more for you to take at face value, as in 'that = works, isn't in my way, and I can work around it'. I believe Dick more = subtly hinted at that statement. bottom line=20 A) I need to see the changes. B) Either way, we must define how Serialised & Controlled stock must = work to come close to staying on the same page. Your knowledge and = apparent need/desire/ability to do this was one of the things that = really attracted me to WE. C) I still like, have a great need for, and see great potential in this = project, so I sincerly doubt you will see me just drop off. jesse > -----Original Message----- > From: Stins, Dick [mailto:DR...@Zi...] > Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 04:41 > To: web...@li... > Subject: Re: [Web-erp-developers] Serial Stuff >=20 >=20 > V > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Phil Daintree" <ph...@du...> > To: <web...@li...> > Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 6:28 AM > Subject: [Web-erp-developers] Serial Stuff >=20 > > Jesse, > > > > Your gonna be mad! > > > > I have done a fair bit on this and have GoodsReceived.php and > > GoodsReceivedControlled.php going ok - with keyed input only at this > stage. > > The changed scripts are: > > > > GoodsReceived.php > > Locations.php; > > PO_Header.php; > > PO_Items.php; > > Stocks.php; > > config.php; > > doc/Change.log; > > includes/ConnectDB.inc; > > includes/DefinePOClass.php; > > includes/PO_ReadInOrder.inc; > > sql/upgrade2.8-2.9.sql; > > sql/web-erp-demo.sql; > > sql/web-erp-new.sql; > > GoodsReceivedControlled.php; > > includes/DefineSerialItems.php; > > > > I am a worried that you may not like what I have done to your serial > stuff. I > > really need help with this and if you bail on me now cos=20 > you dont agree > with > > my direction, I am in trouble. So, I am writing some pre-emptive > explanations > > .... > > > > web-erp has adopted a bunch of conventions which I am keen=20 > to ensure go > right > > through. I don't think other methods are wrong, just they are not > consistent > > with the style used here. Having adapted to those conventions it is > > confusing, at least for me, to look at code written without=20 > using those > > conventions. Consistency of application of these=20 > conventions throughout > are > > important to me. I have spelled these conventions out=20 > elsewhere in the > > developers list. Perhaps for a younger mind this is=20 > probably a non-issue. > > > > I have worked through the GoodsReceivedControlled Code and=20 > notice that > much of > > the code for PO items received is actually in the=20 > StockModules - since it > > will only ever be used from the goods received script I=20 > prefer all code > > relating to that function to be in that one place so the=20 > reader doesn't > have > > to conceptualise through several stages of abstraction. I know the > computer > > scientists would choke on this, but if the code is not=20 > re-used or re-used > > only once then the cost in terms of abstraction is too much=20 > (for me). I > > concede that this is wrong and contrary to accepted wisdom=20 > - but I just > can't > > see it. > Phil, > When you use good names for intuitive=20 > functions/classes/method, then it > should improve readability. Having not all code in the same=20 > script will > improve quality, because only the changed code can raise new=20 > errors. So by > splitting scripts, you will have a big advantage for the=20 > maintance, since > you reduce the creation of errors and this will also reduce=20 > the testing > effors. > You allready accepted the concept of splitting scripts for=20 > readability, > since you use include files, several scripts instead of one=20 > and only one > script for web-erp. > When you want an overall controlling coding standard, then=20 > please use the > PEAR standards. I do also not like every detail in this standard, but > adopting this standard will prevent discussions like this and=20 > might attract > high qualified PEAR developers and prevents you and =20 > developers redoing > coding. > Since web-erp will be growing and growing, you finally will end with a > system which can't be controlled by one person like you do=20 > now. To keep > control over this project, you need a higher abstraction level and > concentrate at business functions and component based=20 > development instead of > bothering about coding details. > Setting up new ideas for anarchitecture with a data ayer,=20 > business rule > validations, ... might a much better improvement. > Setting up development procedures might be effective: > - functional/technical design/development conform standards (PEAR) > - testing > - releasing/configuration management (CVS) >=20 > I am personnally more worried about bugs in WEB-ERP then=20 > different coding > layout styles. >=20 > with best regards, > Dick > > > > The StockModules Stuff ..... > > > > I see what you are doing allowing for alternative=20 > validation and separate > > treatment of other types of stock - I so see the value in this > approach.... > > > > Information specific to the type of stock is stored in my=20 > stockcategory > table > > and perhaps the parameters for validation would be better=20 > held together > with > > other like information in that table, rather than hard=20 > coded and adding > > another level of abstraction for those of us who suffer=20 > with them. I have > not > > coded up this but see no problem in doing so. Where=20 > specific additional > > inserts for new tables peculiar to the business are=20 > required this will > always > > require modification of the code - I like to keep the code=20 > nice and simple > so > > other folks can grasp it and add their flourishes to it. > > > > When I took out the purchase order receive stuff from the > GenericStockModule, > > there really wasn't enough left to justify its existence. > > > > It was on this basis that I dumped the StockModules stuff. Instead I > created a > > DefineSerialItem.php object that just defines the data in=20 > the SerialItems > > array and validates it before adding it - just as I did=20 > with the other > > scripts using arrays of multiple variables. > > > > I have the GoodsReceivedControlled.php working for manual=20 > input/bar code - > I > > defaulted to manual input mode and lost the choices before input was > > possible. I felt that from a users perspective this could be tedious > having > > to select an input method - before diving in with the input=20 > of serial nos. > I > > don't have the file input stuff going, this again looks a=20 > bit tough for > me. > > I've left it in - just commented it out - it needs some TLC=20 > from you - I > > think I've broken it :-( > > > > The GoodsReceivedControlled.php screen is labelled=20 > specifically for either > a > > serialised item or a controlled (and not serialised) item.=20 > The links for > > entry on the GoodsReceived.php script are also labelled=20 > appropriately. The > > not serialiased option refers to a batch qty which is=20 > defaulted to 1 for > > serialiased items. The quantites are accumulated=20 > automatically from the > > inputs made directly into the GoodsReceived.php=20 > $_SESSION['PO']->LineItems > > variable. > > > > I'd like to think that the foundations for Serial and batch=20 > control are > now > > firmly in place and we can code up the other scripts. > > > > I REALLY hope you are still behind me on this and can live=20 > with my mods! > > > > Phil > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the=20 > market... Oracle 10g. > > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick > > _______________________________________________ > > Web-erp-developers mailing list > > Web...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market...=20 > Oracle 10g.=20 > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick > _______________________________________________ > Web-erp-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers >=20 |
From: Jesse P. <jes...@st...> - 2004-05-25 16:31:17
|
That sounds like about everything, though I'd have to double-check = against my notes. I know there is a ton of common code between all those things... = abstraction and/or splitting sections out to included files was my = answer to ease the pains of dealing with it all and ensuring = functionality was the same across the board.=20 I believe some of those, like StockCheck and StockCounts may not be = necessary to enable at a serial level... maybe so to get details, but I = believe the initial info you want from them can be obtained from = StockMoves. jesse > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Daintree [mailto:ph...@du...] > Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 06:55 > To: web...@li... > Subject: [Web-erp-developers] Serial Stuff >=20 >=20 > Commited the ConfirmDispatch_Inovoice.php script with the sql=20 > updates in it to=20 > effect the serial items movements and update to StockSerialItems. >=20 > There's a disturbing number of other places to have=20 > batch/serial number=20 > selection facilities for: >=20 > StockAdjustments > StockTransfers > The new StockLocTransferReceive > CreditInvoice and SelectCreditItems > ReverseGRN >=20 > There is a lot of common code here too ! >=20 > Then there's the StockCheck functionality, StockCounts and =20 > comparison=20 > scripts... >=20 > Have I missed anything Jesse? >=20 > Phil >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market...=20 > Oracle 10g.=20 > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick > _______________________________________________ > Web-erp-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers >=20 |
From: Jesse P. <jes...@st...> - 2004-06-07 13:59:01
|
Phil, many apologies in being no help the past few weeks since you = started putting your serial work back out. I just got some help here, = which should free me up to get some of this work done that both you & I = are in need of. jesse > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Daintree [mailto:ph...@du...] > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 04:42 > To: web...@li... > Subject: [Web-erp-developers] Serial Stuff >=20 >=20 > I have pretty well done this now except for ... >=20 > ReverseGRN.php and the stock check functionality creating=20 > stock adjustments=20 > for counted items. I am not sure how to progress with this. >=20 > Any help with testing would be most appreciated. >=20 > Phil >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. > From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one > installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and > evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 > _______________________________________________ > Web-erp-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers >=20 |
From: Daintrees <p.d...@pa...> - 2004-05-22 23:04:46
|
Jesse, Thanks for your response.... your comment 'that works, isn't in my way, and I can work around it' is an aspect I did chew away on for a while. I have not made these changes lightly. Its like I felt I had a nice tidy room, then someone came and pulled all the toys out and left them lying around the room. I just couldn't live with it. The work is just not consistent with a mountain of code which already exists and I can't face re-writing it all consistently with your approach. I have to have it consistent throughout the application. I know I am wrong according to acedemia. Thanks so much for your understanding! Phil |
From: Jesse P. <je...@st...> - 2004-05-23 00:16:19
|
That's almost amusing since I had the same feeling when I started into the code... I'm still going to have to look at it and see if I can manage - I'm not certain that I can get myself into the habit of writing code as verbosely as you would like it, especially since I know I won't and don't want to with any other projects I have going... We'll see how this works out.... jesse Daintrees wrote: >Jesse, > >Thanks for your response.... > >your comment > >'that works, isn't in my way, and I can work around it' > >is an aspect I did chew away on for a while. I have not made these changes >lightly. Its like I felt I had a nice tidy room, then someone came and >pulled all the toys out and left them lying around the room. I just couldn't >live with it. The work is just not consistent with a mountain of code which >already exists and I can't face re-writing it all consistently with your >approach. I have to have it consistent throughout the application. I know I >am wrong according to acedemia. > >Thanks so much for your understanding! > >Phil > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g >Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. >Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click >_______________________________________________ >Web-erp-developers mailing list >Web...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers > > |
From: Daintrees <p.d...@pa...> - 2004-05-23 04:39:57
|
Jesse, I've probably given you worst case up front. It will be quite refereshing for you to see that most of your mods including DB_query, and DefinePOClass, DefineCartClass etc are all still in tact and it is definitely Jesse's work in there just verbosed out for the hard of programming! Very relieved your still with me on this! Phil |
From: Jesse P. <je...@st...> - 2004-05-23 15:50:36
|
yeah, but I really liked the StockModules. Anywho, where is this code? cvs? not quite in cvs? Daintrees wrote: >Jesse, > >I've probably given you worst case up front. It will be quite refereshing >for you to see that most of your mods including DB_query, and DefinePOClass, >DefineCartClass etc are all still in tact and it is definitely Jesse's work >in there just verbosed out for the hard of programming! > >Very relieved your still with me on this! > >Phil > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g >Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. >Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click >_______________________________________________ >Web-erp-developers mailing list >Web...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers > > |
From: Daintrees <p.d...@pa...> - 2004-05-23 20:01:30
|
I have done a little work on DefineCartClass.inc and ConfirmDispatchControlled_Invoice.php which is not in CVS - everything else is. Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jesse Peterson" <je...@st...> To: <web...@li...> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 3:50 AM Subject: Re: [Web-erp-developers] Re: Serial Stuff > yeah, but I really liked the StockModules. Anywho, where is this code? > cvs? not quite in cvs? > > > Daintrees wrote: > > >Jesse, > > > >I've probably given you worst case up front. It will be quite refereshing > >for you to see that most of your mods including DB_query, and DefinePOClass, > >DefineCartClass etc are all still in tact and it is definitely Jesse's work > >in there just verbosed out for the hard of programming! > > > >Very relieved your still with me on this! > > > >Phil > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- > >This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > >Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. > >Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click > >_______________________________________________ > >Web-erp-developers mailing list > >Web...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g > Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. > Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Web-erp-developers mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers > |