FT/TT Minutes 20160426

Log

Good morning everybody!

[26/04/2016 8:13:16 AM] Michael McKay: Morning. Unfortunately, I won't be able to participate fully this morning. Here is a proposed agenda though.

[26/04/2016 8:16:18 AM] Eduardo Lopez: Hi Ossagho, Mike, Mario

[26/04/2016 8:16:27 AM] OSSAGHO: hi

[26/04/2016 8:17:00 AM | Edited 8:18:26 AM] Michael McKay: Proposed agenda

Review last week's discussion
Review Road Map
Look at actions and progress from last week
Discuss Trifon’s comment about the lonely development – how can we collaborate more?
Costing issues – review progress since last week
Review pull requests - if any
Other ideas
Review and set action list
[26/04/2016 8:18:31 AM] Gabriel Vila: Hi all, good morning.

[26/04/2016 8:19:19 AM] Mario Calderón: Ok

[26/04/2016 8:20:28 AM] Michael McKay: On the other ideas - I would like to include the sahi test environment with the main repo since it is much easier to keep the tests aligned with the code. There is a forum post on the topic. I'd appreciate comments/ideas.

[26/04/2016 8:21:19 AM] Michael McKay: We also need to keep the wiki up-to-date. I added the minutes of the 12 Apr meeting. Need to add last weeks and add a master action list there.

[26/04/2016 8:21:38 AM] Michael McKay: Sorry - but will have to catch up later.

[26/04/2016 8:21:38 AM] Mario Calderón: Thanks for the agenda Mike.

[26/04/2016 8:22:46 AM] Mario Calderón: Do we start now or is somebody missing?

[26/04/2016 8:34:09 AM] Mario Calderón: I will put the first item for discussion

[26/04/2016 8:34:37 AM] Steven _: hi Mario

[26/04/2016 8:34:52 AM] Mario Calderón: Proposed agenda 1. Review last week's discussion

[26/04/2016 8:37:14 AM] Victor Perez: Hi Mario

[26/04/2016 8:38:03 AM] Mario Calderón: Any comments? Hi Victor!

[26/04/2016 8:39:05 AM] Mario Calderón: I think one issue was Trifon's. Could it be solved?

[26/04/2016 8:40:22 AM] Victor Perez: What issue ?

[26/04/2016 8:41:57 AM] Mario Calderón: I read he and you wrote a lot

[26/04/2016 8:42:11 AM] Victor Perez: I finish with last changes for pos

[26/04/2016 8:43:20 AM] Victor Perez: So that this week star with patch system

[26/04/2016 8:45:05 AM] Victor Perez: Also reviewed the cost trx for standard

[26/04/2016 8:45:16 AM] Mario Calderón: Right. We will test the last changes.

[26/04/2016 8:45:33 AM] Victor Perez: And average po

[26/04/2016 8:47:09 AM] Victor Perez: We Yamel and me add new improves

[26/04/2016 8:47:28 AM] Victor Perez: In smart browser

[26/04/2016 8:48:06 AM] Victor Perez: Create the templete abstract process

[26/04/2016 8:49:24 AM] Mario Calderón: What does Trifon say?

[26/04/2016 8:52:26 AM] Mario Calderón: I read Trifon had difficulties migrating to the newest revision. Have them been solved? Can it happen to others?

[26/04/2016 8:54:36 AM] Yamel Senih: Hi everybody

[26/04/2016 8:55:07 AM] Mario Calderón: So the xml do work now?

[26/04/2016 8:56:24 AM] Mario Calderón: I read it was something with a name...

[26/04/2016 8:57:49 AM] Victor Perez: The issue about the migration is that system now only support create

[26/04/2016 8:58:23 AM] Victor Perez: Using adempiere user as schema

[26/04/2016 8:58:56 AM] Victor Perez: Trifon change of standard user

[26/04/2016 8:59:30 AM] Victor Perez: But it was this way from always

[26/04/2016 9:01:08 AM] Victor Perez: We would change to make test

[26/04/2016 9:01:52 AM] Victor Perez: I think worked

[26/04/2016 9:02:09 AM] Victor Perez: Mike and Yamel tested

[26/04/2016 9:02:26 AM] Mario Calderón: Ah!ok thanks. About POS Victor :tests are about to be finished this week and then the POS will be integrated into Adempiere branch "develop"?

[26/04/2016 9:02:44 AM] Victor Perez: I am wait the Yamel partner

[26/04/2016 9:03:49 AM] Victor Perez: He is working to setting travisci

[26/04/2016 9:04:16 AM] Victor Perez: To continuos integration

[26/04/2016 9:04:55 AM] Victor Perez: But Yamel should to say of status

[26/04/2016 9:05:32 AM] Mario Calderón: Ok. Yamel?

[26/04/2016 9:07:20 AM] Mario Calderón: Can we move on? If somebody is not present he can comment later.

[26/04/2016 9:08:28 AM] Victor Perez: Yes que can intégrate

[26/04/2016 9:08:53 AM] Victor Perez: Se need review and clase

[26/04/2016 9:09:07 AM] Victor Perez: All issue ticket

[26/04/2016 9:09:25 AM] Victor Perez: And i can intégrate

[26/04/2016 9:10:53 AM] Mario Calderón: OK. 2. Review Road Map

[26/04/2016 9:11:25 AM] Mario Calderón: Anything here? I think not.

[26/04/2016 9:14:37 AM] Trifon Trifonov: hi Team, has anyone created Statement of Account report which lists all Invoices, Credit Notes, Payments for specific customer or vendor?

[26/04/2016 9:15:45 AM] Victor Perez: Hi Trifon

[26/04/2016 9:15:53 AM | Edited 9:15:56 AM] Trifon Trifonov: hi Victor

[26/04/2016 9:16:01 AM] OSSAGHO: We had created jasper report, finally we found that existing report is good to use

[26/04/2016 9:16:03 AM] Victor Perez: I made and are included

[26/04/2016 9:16:28 AM] Victor Perez: Now 380#002

[26/04/2016 9:16:34 AM] OSSAGHO: can you pls explain any problem you face

[26/04/2016 9:16:43 AM] Victor Perez: Into of open ítem

[26/04/2016 9:16:56 AM] Trifon Trifonov: in 3.6.0 there is not customer statement of account.

[26/04/2016 9:17:03 AM] OSSAGHO: Hi Victor, What is different in your report

[26/04/2016 9:17:14 AM] Victor Perez: Bank statement report

[26/04/2016 9:17:14 AM | Edited 9:17:33 AM] OSSAGHO: I am using 380

[26/04/2016 9:17:29 AM] Victor Perez: I am using make clase pos system

[26/04/2016 9:17:30 AM] Trifon Trifonov: Victor it should list all transactions for the customer, not only open for a time period.

[26/04/2016 9:18:06 AM] Victor Perez: Haaa

[26/04/2016 9:18:10 AM] Steven _: @Trifon re "hi Team, has anyone created Statement of Account report which lists all Invoices, Credit Notes, Payments for specific customer or vendor?"

[26/04/2016 9:18:15 AM] Victor Perez: For customer

[26/04/2016 9:18:40 AM] Steven _: we did it just by using the GL trial balance report

[26/04/2016 9:19:28 AM] Trifon Trifonov: Steven but you have to limit it somehow. GL shows all transactions.

[26/04/2016 9:19:32 AM] Steven _: added a button on the customer ab=nd vendor tab that just stars the report and inherits the BP

[26/04/2016 9:19:56 AM] Victor Perez: I used report AR afín

[26/04/2016 9:19:56 AM] Yamel Senih: Ok

[26/04/2016 9:20:00 AM] Victor Perez: Afín

[26/04/2016 9:20:10 AM] Victor Perez: Aging

[26/04/2016 9:20:48 AM] Victor Perez: Or open statement in open ítems

[26/04/2016 9:20:53 AM] Yamel Senih: We have a statement account based in documents

[26/04/2016 9:21:14 AM] Steven _: it filters to the BP .. brabs all the trx from the GL acount that is set as AR control in the BP Customer accounting

[26/04/2016 9:22:24 AM | Edited 9:22:49 AM] Trifon Trifonov: Steven how do you filter?

[26/04/2016 9:22:38 AM] Trifon Trifonov: with the standard report params or you do it via DB View?

[26/04/2016 9:25:29 AM] Yamel Senih: @Trifon we have a report for statement account with previous balance to date and show AP, AR, Payment, receipt and allocations

[26/04/2016 9:25:43 AM] Yamel Senih: I don't know if it is util for you

[26/04/2016 9:25:59 AM] Yamel Senih: And if it is util fotlr standard ADempiere

[26/04/2016 9:26:00 AM] Trifon Trifonov: Yamel, how do you make this report?

[26/04/2016 9:26:21 AM] Trifon Trifonov: new DB View?

[26/04/2016 9:26:46 AM] Yamel Senih: No, it is with a temporally table and vier

[26/04/2016 9:26:50 AM] Yamel Senih: View

[26/04/2016 9:27:32 AM] Yamel Senih: You can see the balance and movement at one date with open balance in this date

[26/04/2016 9:27:50 AM] Trifon Trifonov: Yamel, can you share it?

[26/04/2016 9:28:01 AM] Yamel Senih: Off course

[26/04/2016 9:28:18 AM] Yamel Senih: I think that it can be part of ADempiere standard

[26/04/2016 9:28:38 AM] Steven _: Trifon, in case it is useful to you .. go to 104test.adaxa.com standard credentials... open the BP Joe Block and go to the Customer tab .. amd see the 4 buttons that each fire of different processes.

[26/04/2016 9:28:45 AM] Yamel Senih: Currently exist a open balance but is very hard know the balance at date

[26/04/2016 9:29:04 AM] Mario Calderón: I think it would be a good idea if all involved in this financial report issue would meet and come out with solutions. WDYT?

[26/04/2016 9:30:06 AM] Steven _: the buttons create reports for Trial Balance, Unapplied Payments, unposted payements and open invoices ... and all just basically AD changes

[26/04/2016 9:30:55 AM] Steven _: the trial balance allows you to choose any start date and computes the balance outstanding at thatstart date

[26/04/2016 9:31:33 AM] Victor Perez: if is based on history then you need a new view from C_Invoce and C_Payment

[26/04/2016 9:31:46 AM] Victor Perez: using an union

[26/04/2016 9:32:14 AM] Victor Perez: this way you can sort by date and document type , and get so an history transaction

[26/04/2016 9:32:23 AM] Yamel Senih: It is not just view, is necessary know the allocation at date

[26/04/2016 9:32:38 AM] Victor Perez: the main issue is get the balance to a specific date

[26/04/2016 9:32:47 AM] Victor Perez: but would use a function

[26/04/2016 9:32:58 AM] Yamel Senih: With the allocation at date you can know the balance at date

[26/04/2016 9:33:10 AM] Victor Perez: of parameter would be C_BPartner

[26/04/2016 9:33:14 AM] Victor Perez: Document Type

[26/04/2016 9:33:23 AM] Victor Perez: DateAcct

[26/04/2016 9:33:29 AM] Victor Perez: Range amount

[26/04/2016 9:34:09 AM] Trifon Trifonov: Steven, thank you!

[26/04/2016 9:34:17 AM] Victor Perez: I add new parameter in detail payment

[26/04/2016 9:34:44 AM] Victor Perez: I think that can see here to get an idea that parameters can use

[26/04/2016 9:34:49 AM] Yamel Senih: @Victor the big issue for balance is that the allocation allow create it many to many instead one by one

[26/04/2016 9:35:49 AM] Victor Perez: I think that Trifon need is some as a statement credit card

[26/04/2016 9:36:12 AM] Victor Perez: where are the AR documents and Payment

[26/04/2016 9:36:46 AM] Victor Perez: as say Steven would be easy get from accounts

[26/04/2016 9:36:56 AM] Victor Perez: but a lot customer not have the account today

[26/04/2016 9:36:58 AM] Victor Perez: :(

[26/04/2016 9:37:31 AM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor, yes, on this Statement of Customer/Vendor account I need to show Invoices, Credit Memo, Payments

[26/04/2016 9:38:15 AM] Victor Perez: then is an union C_Invoice and C_Payment by C_BPartner_ID

[26/04/2016 9:38:24 AM] Trifon Trifonov: yes.

[26/04/2016 9:38:30 AM] Victor Perez: Sort by account date

[26/04/2016 9:38:58 AM] Victor Perez: 3 column AR Amount , Payment , Calculated Balance

[26/04/2016 9:39:05 AM] Steven _: works fine ... until multiple currecies involved :(

[26/04/2016 9:39:24 AM] Victor Perez: and currency :)

[26/04/2016 9:39:59 AM] Victor Perez: but is a big issue try show in a currency report

[26/04/2016 9:40:11 AM] Victor Perez: because need a rate for an date

[26/04/2016 9:40:33 AM] Victor Perez: now a big issue is that the source document have not save of rate

[26/04/2016 9:40:55 AM] Victor Perez: we only have the source currency amount

[26/04/2016 9:41:25 AM] Victor Perez: we should have save the persiste of rate or currency amt

[26/04/2016 9:41:45 AM] Victor Perez: it issue found in pay selection with Yamel

[26/04/2016 9:42:10 AM] Victor Perez: but we need C_Currency , C_ConvertType, Rate in all document

[26/04/2016 9:42:21 AM] Steven _: safest is to extend the payment allocation line and record the amount of the foreign currency that was applied and then do not have to recalculate all the time

[26/04/2016 9:42:22 AM] Victor Perez: with rate we would get any report

[26/04/2016 9:43:28 AM | Edited 9:43:47 AM] Steven _: then it does not matter if someone adds or changes exchange rates because the rate that was used in the allocation is stored in the allocation line because you have an amount in both currencies

[26/04/2016 9:44:39 AM] Steven _: as it works now if the allocation is in a currency different to the invoice currency just adding a new exchange rate can stuff up the reports

[26/04/2016 9:49:07 AM] Steven _: @Trifon, you can probably clone what is there if it is useful for you ... there are xml migration scripts that would add it all for you but I saw you had problems with xml migration

[26/04/2016 9:49:13 AM] Victor Perez: but it approach is good for the real changes exchange profit or lost

[26/04/2016 9:49:22 AM] Victor Perez: but not realized is more complex

[26/04/2016 9:51:45 AM | Edited 9:52:17 AM] Steven _: just to put on the record ... if you have an invoice date as january, payment date as february and allocation date as March and exchange rates have changed between each the there is an error in calculating the realised exchange gain ...it ignores the diff in rate between payment date an allocation date but picks up the diff between invoice date an allocation rate .. it has been fixed if people are interested.

[26/04/2016 9:54:21 AM] Victor Perez: but I am agree set the changes exchange in allocation would solve a lot the complex case for real changes exchange

[26/04/2016 9:57:19 AM] Mario Calderón: Thanks Steven. Adaxa's contributions will be included in the next release after 3.8.1. Meanwhile does the branch Paul was about to create ready?

[26/04/2016 10:01:06 AM] Steven _: its ready and I will ask him tomorrow if he has uploaded to SF

[26/04/2016 10:01:39 AM] Yamel Senih: Hi

[26/04/2016 10:02:15 AM] Yamel Senih: the SF project is maintained now?

[26/04/2016 10:03:54 AM] Mario Calderón: Better actually Github

[26/04/2016 10:04:09 AM] Mario Calderón: There's the official repository

[26/04/2016 10:05:42 AM] Steven _: bye

[26/04/2016 10:06:26 AM] Mario Calderón: Bye Steven

[26/04/2016 10:06:39 AM] Mario Calderón: Should we move on?

[26/04/2016 10:07:23 AM] Yamel Senih: bye Steven

[26/04/2016 10:07:32 AM] Mario Calderón: 4. Discuss Trifon’s comment about the lonely development – how can we collaborate more?

[26/04/2016 10:08:50 AM] Victor Perez: Al should tests and send the pull res with parches

[26/04/2016 10:09:16 AM] Victor Perez: We need more commiter

[26/04/2016 10:09:38 AM] Victor Perez: Now only are 3 :(

[26/04/2016 10:10:20 AM] Victor Perez: I want seed the Commit from Mario

[26/04/2016 10:10:25 AM] Victor Perez: Gabriel

[26/04/2016 10:10:33 AM] Victor Perez: Trifon

[26/04/2016 10:10:35 AM] Victor Perez: Teo

[26/04/2016 10:10:52 AM] Victor Perez: Any develop

[26/04/2016 10:11:11 AM] Victor Perez: We have leave of prívate fork

[26/04/2016 10:12:22 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Trifon, re: Customer Statements, I did this back when we started out and submitted it as a RFE with a Patch ...

[26/04/2016 10:12:33 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Trifon, https://sourceforge.net/p/adempiere/feature-requests/124/

[26/04/2016 10:12:40 AM] Mario Calderón: Ok. We must learn to cooperate better

[26/04/2016 10:12:41 AM] Colin ROONEY: sorry to interrupt guys!

[26/04/2016 10:13:07 AM] Mario Calderón: Hi Colin!!

[26/04/2016 10:14:35 AM] Colin ROONEY: Hi Mario, hi All

[26/04/2016 10:14:44 AM] Mario Calderón: What about the testing methodology? Mike is good at Sahi, Victor has wrote tests in Scala.

[26/04/2016 10:16:17 AM] Colin ROONEY: my 2c having used neither is, sahi should be more accessible but scala might be better for those more technical, i.e. for unit testing

[26/04/2016 10:16:35 AM] Colin ROONEY: but how many know scala?

[26/04/2016 10:18:02 AM] Victor Perez: Hi Colin

[26/04/2016 10:18:17 AM] Victor Perez: @Mario the approach are different

[26/04/2016 10:18:20 AM] Colin ROONEY: hi Victor, checked out orientDB - looks real interesting!

[26/04/2016 10:18:41 AM] Victor Perez: the Sahi are test more funcional and testing of UI and logic

[26/04/2016 10:18:53 AM] Colin ROONEY: +1 agreed

[26/04/2016 10:18:57 AM] Victor Perez: and the scala are more for regression test

[26/04/2016 10:19:14 AM] Victor Perez: the idea is that using travis CI

[26/04/2016 10:19:25 AM] Victor Perez: in future we can run all regression test

[26/04/2016 10:19:32 AM] Victor Perez: and validate that all are ok

[26/04/2016 10:19:55 AM] Yamel Senih: Hi @Colin

[26/04/2016 10:20:01 AM] Victor Perez: Yamel and me have a propouse

[26/04/2016 10:20:12 AM] Victor Perez: write an test by week or more if is possible

[26/04/2016 10:20:23 AM] Yamel Senih: yes

[26/04/2016 10:20:37 AM] Victor Perez: may be a new feature

[26/04/2016 10:20:42 AM] Victor Perez: a new functionality

[26/04/2016 10:20:47 AM] Victor Perez: a new test

[26/04/2016 10:21:28 AM] Colin ROONEY: Hi @Yamel

[26/04/2016 10:21:34 AM] Victor Perez: but should be a permanently campaign

[26/04/2016 10:22:16 AM] Colin ROONEY: So I guess then for Mario's question then Sahi is the answer?

[26/04/2016 10:22:42 AM] Yamel Senih: the idea is create a little feature per week and fixed a issue per week

[26/04/2016 10:23:17 AM] Yamel Senih: also should exists a test by week and one article by week

[26/04/2016 10:23:18 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Victor, yes. It seems harder now the code is written to add the tests. BUt yes whenever something is changed then that seems like a good point to add a test. I do think most would find it easier to write java unit tests for their java code rather than scala ones

[26/04/2016 10:24:27 AM] Victor Perez: :)

[26/04/2016 10:24:34 AM] Victor Perez: Scala is more easy

[26/04/2016 10:24:50 AM] Victor Perez: I set some examples so other developer can continue

[26/04/2016 10:25:14 AM] Colin ROONEY: it's all running in the same JVM so it might not matter. I've only read the blurbs so far not tried any code. And with each version java seems to become more like scala! :)

[26/04/2016 10:25:22 AM] Victor Perez: the Scala is more DSL so the business logic is more easy set as expression

[26/04/2016 10:27:10 AM] Victor Perez: here a simple test

[26/04/2016 10:27:12 AM] Victor Perez: https://github.com/adempiere/adempiere/blob/hotfix/3.8.0%23002/org.adempiere.test/src/test/scala/org/eevolution/test/CreateSalesOrder.scala

[26/04/2016 10:27:19 AM] Colin ROONEY: I'll take your word for it ... the scala I saw in blog could be very ... complicated :) I did see some of your scala tests when I was looking at the ... was it the docker project

[26/04/2016 10:27:22 AM] Colin ROONEY: ?

[26/04/2016 10:27:22 AM] Michael McKay: Hi guys, I'm back. Sahi is just a web interface tester, so the test are purely from the point of view of the user. I would hope to include all functional tests listed here: http://wiki.adempiere.net/Functional_Tests

[26/04/2016 10:30:33 AM] Michael McKay: The issue with testing is that the test complexity matches the code complexity and the tests use different "language" (not java) so it is not easy to adopt. I think the framework adopted in the test environment can be setup to ease this a bit but there will always be a need of expertise in the tests.

[26/04/2016 10:31:09 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Mike, hi - so how much of that list is already a test?

[26/04/2016 10:31:26 AM] Victor Perez: the issue with this approach Mike is that is script test

[26/04/2016 10:31:39 AM] Victor Perez: based on event persistence

[26/04/2016 10:32:09 AM | Edited 10:32:16 AM] Victor Perez: So if the UI change then all test not will work

[26/04/2016 10:32:43 AM] Michael McKay: @Colin most of 1 through 9.

[26/04/2016 10:34:53 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Victor, a good point re UI changes! @Mike, so nearly half way! Maybe, take one or two of the already completed Sahi tests and Victor could Scala-ise them for the rest to see and compare?? I agree victor it is readable - not know scala I cannot say what is DSL and what is Scala.

[26/04/2016 10:35:08 AM] Victor Perez: I will use Selenium

[26/04/2016 10:35:10 AM] Victor Perez: http://www.scalatest.org/user_guide/using_selenium

[26/04/2016 10:35:48 AM] Michael McKay: For the Sahi - the UI has to be http://. Then there is a wrapper to deal with how the UI is presented so the tests are not UI specific. EG.

wOpenTab("Order");
iFormView();
iNewRecord();
fSetSearch("C_BPartner_ID",$CustomerName);
fSetList("C_DocTypeTarget_ID",$DocTypeTarget);
iSaveRecord();
wOpenTab("Order Line");
iFormView();
iNewRecord();
fSetSearch("M_Product_ID",$ProductName);
iSaveRecord();
wOpenTab("Order");
fDocActionCheck("Complete",$ExpectedStatus);
iZoomAcross();
[26/04/2016 10:35:49 AM] Victor Perez: is similar approach of Mike with Sahi

[26/04/2016 10:36:54 AM] Victor Perez: but of any way we need test , test , test and more test

[26/04/2016 10:36:57 AM] Victor Perez: :)

[26/04/2016 10:37:41 AM] Colin ROONEY: I think we need Solomon here to split these two! :P

[26/04/2016 10:38:18 AM] Victor Perez: if we want migrate to any thing in future we need a good set test

[26/04/2016 10:38:36 AM] Victor Perez: if some have more interest then it book is excellent

[26/04/2016 10:38:37 AM] Victor Perez: http://www.amazon.com/Working-Effectively-Legacy-Michael-Feathers/dp/0131177052

[26/04/2016 10:39:04 AM] Colin ROONEY: yes, very true... but I suspect any tech change will mean a rewrite of the core rather than the functionality

[26/04/2016 10:39:11 AM] Victor Perez: to me all child of Compiere are legacy code :)

[26/04/2016 10:39:44 AM] Victor Perez: and need a way the migrate to today and future

[26/04/2016 10:39:45 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Victor, I have it by my bed for 2 years! But I keep falling asleep when I try to read it :D

[26/04/2016 10:39:55 AM] Victor Perez: and the fist task are the test

[26/04/2016 10:41:10 AM | Edited 10:41:38 AM] Victor Perez: @Colin you need read in of morning

[26/04/2016 10:41:24 AM] Colin ROONEY: lol - why didn't I think of that!

[26/04/2016 10:42:59 AM] Victor Perez: Sorry the auto correction

[26/04/2016 10:44:12 AM] Colin ROONEY: no problem, I understood

[26/04/2016 10:45:42 AM] Michael McKay: So - do we wan't to include these in the core until we pick the set? For me, it would help alot in testing branches, features and any other change before making a big merge decision.

[26/04/2016 10:48:11 AM] Victor Perez: Mike you would add into of org.adempiere.test

[26/04/2016 10:48:25 AM] Victor Perez: here you can set an sahi directory

[26/04/2016 10:48:53 AM] Victor Perez: we can include here all test and experimentation about of test

[26/04/2016 10:49:03 AM] Michael McKay: It is not class based so simply a directory in the adempiere project test/sahi

[26/04/2016 10:49:09 AM] Victor Perez: this package not depend of other projects

[26/04/2016 10:49:14 AM] Victor Perez: is independent

[26/04/2016 10:49:23 AM] Victor Perez: so that can work separately

[26/04/2016 10:50:01 AM] Victor Perez: adempiere/org.adempiere.test/src/test/

[26/04/2016 10:50:10 AM] Victor Perez: here are of test for java

[26/04/2016 10:50:12 AM] Victor Perez: scala

[26/04/2016 10:50:17 AM] Victor Perez: you can add sahi

[26/04/2016 10:50:20 AM] Victor Perez: I think

[26/04/2016 10:51:38 AM] Michael McKay: I'll have a look then and make a pull request with the code.

[26/04/2016 10:52:36 AM] Victor Perez: ok any help you can contact me

[26/04/2016 10:52:41 AM] Michael McKay: Thanks.

[26/04/2016 10:54:07 AM] Michael McKay: On the tests, I am having issues with the extra steps necessary to get GW to work. Do we want GardenWorld to be functional "out of the box" or should we require some setup steps as are currently necessary?

[26/04/2016 10:55:25 AM] Michael McKay: Personnaly, I'd rather it work without having to generate cost transactions and accounting as these are rather technical steps for a simple demo. It means including the data from these in the seed.

[26/04/2016 11:15:07 AM] Colin ROONEY: @Mike, +1 - the other thing that, historically, always needed updating was creating & opening the necessary Periods. While they could all be opened and ready so a beginner didn't get stuck!

[26/04/2016 11:16:52 AM | Edited 11:21:21 AM] Michael McKay: Thanks. That has been done. There is a new process to update the GW data that is available in a menu or when you RUN_migrateXML that will bring all GW data into that last two years and provide open periods for the next few, if not ten).

[26/04/2016 11:21:26 AM] Trifon Trifonov: @Colin, thank you! I will look at the FR

[26/04/2016 11:22:25 AM] Victor Perez: ok Mke

[26/04/2016 11:22:40 AM] Victor Perez: Now we support the Standard cost

[26/04/2016 11:22:55 AM] Victor Perez: Average PO

[26/04/2016 11:23:02 AM] Victor Perez: Average Invoice

[26/04/2016 11:23:21 AM] Victor Perez: I think that now are in Average invoice

[26/04/2016 11:23:36 AM] Victor Perez: if you are agree then we can enable to default

[26/04/2016 11:25:57 AM] Michael McKay: +1 from me.

[26/04/2016 11:28:10 AM | Edited 11:28:18 AM] Trifon Trifonov: @Mike, congrats it seems you catched the bug which I hit when posting Material Receipt with AveragePO

[26/04/2016 11:29:02 AM] Trifon Trifonov: ADempiere was generating Account posting 3 times for each sinle MaterialReceipt line.

[26/04/2016 11:31:20 AM] Mario Calderón: I think we're done with the Testing issue. How about costing? @Trifon: could you join the branch Yamel set up?

[26/04/2016 11:31:51 AM] Michael McKay: @Trifon. Thanks - it has been a team effort.

[26/04/2016 11:32:17 AM] Trifon Trifonov: @Mario, I'm on 360 now, my 380 VirtualMachine died

[26/04/2016 11:32:33 AM] Trifon Trifonov: I will setup new but I'm on very slow network this week

[26/04/2016 11:34:10 AM] Victor Perez: the duplicate posting was solve

[26/04/2016 11:34:19 AM] Victor Perez: for average po

[26/04/2016 11:34:23 AM] Trifon Trifonov: by the way peopl here had lot of fun with me because of all the bugs I hit :(

[26/04/2016 11:34:28 AM] Victor Perez: now are work for standard

[26/04/2016 11:34:33 AM] Victor Perez: avr PO

[26/04/2016 11:34:44 AM] Victor Perez: and avr Inv

[26/04/2016 11:35:53 AM] Victor Perez: when we release a version we make a cycle business complete

[26/04/2016 11:36:06 AM] Victor Perez: in this moment 380#002 not had this test avoid

[26/04/2016 11:42:09 AM] Michael McKay: @Trifon, to be clear, I think it was Victor and Yamel who fixed the issue you were having with multiple postings. I wasn't involved in that but had a different issue related to MRs.

[26/04/2016 11:42:27 AM] Trifon Trifonov: ok.

[26/04/2016 11:46:14 AM] Victor Perez: Hi Mike let review the cost detail about the quantity zero

[26/04/2016 11:46:37 AM] Victor Perez: the idea the create a line in cost detail is to register the adjustment cost

[26/04/2016 11:47:06 AM] Victor Perez: in this case the inventory quantity not is affect but the cost can be modify

[26/04/2016 11:47:49 AM] Victor Perez: for example a product have cost 10 is purchase price list

[26/04/2016 11:48:10 AM] Victor Perez: and for example in the invoice have you 12 is invoice price

[26/04/2016 11:48:23 AM] Victor Perez: then we need 2 of different cost

[26/04/2016 11:49:05 AM] Victor Perez: the MRs is created based on 10 , but when entry the invoice

[26/04/2016 11:49:15 AM] Victor Perez: the price was increase then we need adjustment cost

[26/04/2016 11:49:22 AM] Victor Perez: based on the match inv

[26/04/2016 11:49:40 AM] Victor Perez: the system create a new cost detail with zero qty to register of adjustment

[26/04/2016 11:49:55 AM] Victor Perez: it also work for landed cost functionality

[26/04/2016 11:49:59 AM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor this will chang the AverageInvoice cost.

[26/04/2016 11:50:14 AM] Trifon Trifonov: AveragePO should stay according to the PO price

[26/04/2016 11:50:46 AM] Victor Perez: I am told about the Average Invoice

[26/04/2016 11:50:52 AM] Victor Perez: in Average PO not should change

[26/04/2016 11:50:59 AM] Michael McKay: Understand the costing. The problem is that the MR only uses the zero qty and cost cost detail creating a fact that has zero quantity. The match invoice uses the quantity in the facts to find the entry to reverse and can't find a match so the posting result is invalid.

[26/04/2016 11:51:01 AM] Victor Perez: but I need a way the balanced the account

[26/04/2016 11:51:18 AM] Victor Perez: because is necessary calculate a variance Invoice

[26/04/2016 11:51:31 AM] Victor Perez: I not sure how work in old cost engine

[26/04/2016 11:51:59 AM] Victor Perez: because what is the benefits of use average PO i I need in accounting calculate an adjustment

[26/04/2016 11:52:29 AM] Victor Perez: to balanced the receipt not invoiced vs cost adjustment

[26/04/2016 11:52:53 AM] Victor Perez: May be Steven remember what was the accounting logic in 360

[26/04/2016 11:53:23 AM] Victor Perez: @Trifon do you know what happen with the different between PO price and Invoice Price in accounting ?

[26/04/2016 11:56:53 AM | Edited 11:57:16 AM] Victor Perez: @Mike let me check

[26/04/2016 11:57:27 AM] Victor Perez: based on the Garden World information

[26/04/2016 11:57:27 AM | Edited 11:57:48 AM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor, I'm not sure, but if company uses AveragePO then it should calculate and use Average PO.

[26/04/2016 11:57:58 AM] Victor Perez: @Trifon yes this is first step

[26/04/2016 11:58:19 AM] Victor Perez: but some moment we need inventory valuation

[26/04/2016 11:58:32 AM] Victor Perez: and close the inventory balance

[26/04/2016 11:58:54 AM] Trifon Trifonov: I have one customer who uses AveragePO, but they have policy that they do not pay Vendor invoice if Invoice price <> PO price.

[26/04/2016 11:59:40 AM | Edited 12:00:05 PM] Michael McKay: @Victor, see FactLine.java, updateReversalLine(). Trace this when completing/reposting match invoice 100 or 101 in GW.

[26/04/2016 11:59:47 AM] Trifon Trifonov: my point is that AveragePO and AverageInvoice should calculate different costs. If we make them calculate the same cost then we just do not need 2 methods.

[26/04/2016 12:02:01 PM] Victor Perez: in new cost engine we create an class factory

[26/04/2016 12:02:18 PM] Victor Perez: ehac costing method the implementation based on interface

[26/04/2016 12:03:12 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor I do not mind. I just want to know if all we have common understanding about Costing methods.

[26/04/2016 12:03:23 PM] Victor Perez: so the behavior is similar in all the Implementations

[26/04/2016 12:03:46 PM] Trifon Trifonov: ok, but I do not know if we have common ground/understanding.

[26/04/2016 12:03:55 PM] Victor Perez: is more easy debugging and not entry with the cobwebs of old approach

[26/04/2016 12:04:23 PM] Victor Perez: this was a nightmare

[26/04/2016 12:05:18 PM] Michael McKay: Perhaps we can document the scenarios and cost results of each method. It would be helpful for testing as well as the common understanding.

[26/04/2016 12:05:47 PM] Victor Perez: in past noting costing method works properly

[26/04/2016 12:06:07 PM] Victor Perez: only work when have all perfect world

[26/04/2016 12:06:17 PM] Victor Perez: not reverse transaction

[26/04/2016 12:06:21 PM] Victor Perez: not entry error

[26/04/2016 12:06:25 PM] Victor Perez: not landed cost

[26/04/2016 12:06:48 PM] Victor Perez: the average only average amount in a box

[26/04/2016 12:06:54 PM | Edited 12:07:04 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor, ok. Can we make as @Mike proposed to document how costing is expectd to wrok at least from hig level.

[26/04/2016 12:07:41 PM] Trifon Trifonov: For example my understanding is that AveragePO must post Material Receipt with the price from PO.

[26/04/2016 12:07:46 PM] Victor Perez: but never can make that my accounting are according with my transactions

[26/04/2016 12:08:02 PM] Trifon Trifonov: InvoiceVendor price should not affect AveragePO costing.

[26/04/2016 12:08:30 PM] Victor Perez: yes each cost type is independent in cost details

[26/04/2016 12:08:33 PM] Victor Perez: transaction

[26/04/2016 12:08:54 PM] Victor Perez: are different cost type then is a register for each cost type

[26/04/2016 12:10:05 PM] Victor Perez: The most complex of old cost approach was that there was no way to regenerate costs

[26/04/2016 12:10:50 PM] Victor Perez: yes I will work with Mike about the that Garden World work perfectly with Average cost

[26/04/2016 12:10:58 PM] Victor Perez: and will test Average PO and Standard

[26/04/2016 12:12:34 PM] Michael McKay: I'll update the wiki - there is an old page I started but never finished with links to other pages with historical stuff: http://wiki.adempiere.net/Costing

[26/04/2016 12:12:42 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor, I'm not asking you work with Mike, I just ask everyong to build common knowledge

[26/04/2016 12:13:10 PM] Victor Perez: ok

[26/04/2016 12:13:26 PM] Victor Perez: then the average PO should simple average based on price PO

[26/04/2016 12:13:41 PM] Victor Perez: it is ok for inventory transaction and valuation inventory

[26/04/2016 12:13:42 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor what is your understanding about AveragePO cost?

[26/04/2016 12:14:02 PM] Trifon Trifonov: yes, AvergaPO is just using the PO prices.

[26/04/2016 12:14:10 PM] Victor Perez: but we need balanced the accounting to make accounting close period

[26/04/2016 12:14:16 PM] Trifon Trifonov: when Material Receipt is entered.

[26/04/2016 12:15:00 PM] Victor Perez: in world real not can stop the process for that an invoice have .005 of different in the price , it can be currency rate lost

[26/04/2016 12:15:07 PM] Trifon Trifonov: ok, you mean what we make with the difference between PO and Invoice price

[26/04/2016 12:15:30 PM] Victor Perez: or I am agree to accept of different then we need have a way that how management this different

[26/04/2016 12:15:31 PM] Trifon Trifonov: we post it to account, but do not update the cost.

[26/04/2016 12:15:35 PM] Victor Perez: in accouting

[26/04/2016 12:15:49 PM] Trifon Trifonov: I suppose that accountants can answer better

[26/04/2016 12:16:16 PM] Victor Perez: yes but need be solve

[26/04/2016 12:16:31 PM] Victor Perez: if not the cycle with average PO not can be close

[26/04/2016 12:16:37 PM] Victor Perez: is simple

[26/04/2016 12:17:07 PM] Victor Perez: debit inventory asset 100 , credit receipt not invoiced 100

[26/04/2016 12:17:18 PM] Victor Perez: but the invoice is receipt is for 101

[26/04/2016 12:17:46 PM | Edited 12:17:52 PM] Victor Perez: then the system make debit to adjustment cost to 101 , credit AP 101

[26/04/2016 12:18:18 PM] Victor Perez: when the invoice is matched with receipt material , the cost engine make

[26/04/2016 12:18:45 PM] Victor Perez: debit receipt not invoiced 101 and credit adjustment cost to 101

[26/04/2016 12:19:01 PM] Trifon Trifonov: we need to post it to invoice price variance

[26/04/2016 12:19:13 PM] Victor Perez: in the end balanced I got 1 usd not close in receipt not invoiced account

[26/04/2016 12:19:43 PM] Victor Perez: this is the right post it to invoice price variance

[26/04/2016 12:19:51 PM] Trifon Trifonov: I will ask tomorrow how it is handld here as they need AveragePO

[26/04/2016 12:19:53 PM] Victor Perez: it is only in standard cost

[26/04/2016 12:20:08 PM] Victor Perez: but I not sure , may be here Steven or Susanne can confirm

[26/04/2016 12:20:41 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor do you mean that only in Standard Costing difference must be posted to Invoice Price Variance account?

[26/04/2016 12:21:49 PM] Victor Perez: I know that standard cost only use variance

[26/04/2016 12:21:55 PM] Victor Perez: Invoice Price Variance

[26/04/2016 12:22:01 PM] Victor Perez: Method Variance

[26/04/2016 12:22:09 PM] Victor Perez: Use Variance

[26/04/2016 12:22:12 PM] Victor Perez: Mix Variance

[26/04/2016 12:22:23 PM] Victor Perez: but in average I not sure

[26/04/2016 12:22:49 PM] Victor Perez: because the unique way is register this variance in income statement as a lost

[26/04/2016 12:23:12 PM] Victor Perez: and I not sure they want affect he income statement using average PO

[26/04/2016 12:23:31 PM] Victor Perez: but is good know that an accountant think

[26/04/2016 12:24:59 PM] Victor Perez: @Mike what are product that your are using and documents PO and Invoice to validate Average cost in Garden World

[26/04/2016 12:25:07 PM] Trifon Trifonov: yes, exactly this is what I mean that we must build common knowldge how different costing methods must be handled/working.

[26/04/2016 12:25:55 PM] Victor Perez: ok we are agree then

[26/04/2016 12:26:22 PM] Victor Perez: I have the accounting latino america approach :)

[26/04/2016 12:26:40 PM] Victor Perez: but I need other world place

[26/04/2016 12:27:04 PM] Trifon Trifonov: ok. good.

[26/04/2016 12:27:46 PM] Trifon Trifonov: so all we agree to build common knowledge about how different costing methods should work.

[26/04/2016 12:28:08 PM] Victor Perez: So Steven can give the australian approach

[26/04/2016 12:28:13 PM | Edited 12:28:26 PM] Trifon Trifonov: best is to document it in the wiki so that we have it written.

[26/04/2016 12:28:33 PM] Victor Perez: Susanne the German approach

[26/04/2016 12:29:24 PM | Edited 12:30:20 PM] Victor Perez: Mike Judd and Colín the england approach

[26/04/2016 12:29:55 PM] Victor Perez: And Mike mckey of Canadian approach

[26/04/2016 12:58:47 PM | Edited 12:59:54 PM] Michael McKay: @Victor, Sorry - had to step away. After a fresh import/migrate and generation of cost and financial data, look at the unposted documents. There are two matched invoices that are not posted (100 & 101). Product is a Plum Tree and Oak Tree. Material Receipts are posted (1000000 & 1000001).

[26/04/2016 2:08:45 PM] Victor Perez: @Mike what is the class for update the garden world data?

[26/04/2016 2:14:25 PM] Victor Perez: @Mike I am review that the Material Receipts are posted (1000000 & 1000001) with zero

[26/04/2016 2:14:35 PM] Victor Perez: because not have purchase link

[26/04/2016 2:14:58 PM] Victor Perez: I not understand how should I allow receipt an Material Receipts with purchase order

[26/04/2016 2:15:27 PM] Victor Perez: if this is necessary then we need a way the get some cost from a place

[26/04/2016 2:16:08 PM] Victor Perez: but is very strange generate an material receipt without Purchase order , it not is a good practice

[26/04/2016 2:19:50 PM] Michael McKay: org.compiere.process.CleanUpGW

[26/04/2016 2:20:36 PM] Michael McKay: Dealing with bad practises is a major challenge for us, but we have to accommodate it.

[26/04/2016 2:20:44 PM] Michael McKay: Here is a case:

[26/04/2016 2:20:52 PM] Victor Perez: can change of name to CleanUpGardenWorld ?

[26/04/2016 2:21:01 PM] Victor Perez: I never will found with this name

[26/04/2016 2:21:02 PM] Victor Perez: jejejeje

[26/04/2016 2:21:21 PM] Michael McKay: Sure. I have to look in the process to find the class.

[26/04/2016 2:22:04 PM] Victor Perez: the current cost engine get the first cost from 2 source

[26/04/2016 2:22:16 PM] Victor Perez: the inicial physical inventory

[26/04/2016 2:22:25 PM] Victor Perez: or from a purchase order

[26/04/2016 2:23:06 PM] Victor Perez: not exist other way , then we would add other approach , but is complex support for audit people take any cost without support

[26/04/2016 2:23:08 PM] Victor Perez: :(

[26/04/2016 2:24:12 PM] Michael McKay: In the end, you are regenerating the cost data after the fact anyway. If the cost data is not available at the time, its OK - it will be fixed when it is available.

[26/04/2016 2:25:07 PM] Michael McKay: We balance everything on the basis of an accounting day right? We don't keep books by the hour. At the end of the account date, there needs to be a cost.

[26/04/2016 2:27:07 PM] Michael McKay: And perhaps that happens some time after the fact.

[26/04/2016 2:27:23 PM] Victor Perez: but is strange register quantity in warehouse using zero cost

[26/04/2016 2:27:39 PM] Victor Perez: and error was for process not for adempiere

[26/04/2016 2:27:53 PM] Victor Perez: you not should create an material receipt without purchase order

[26/04/2016 2:28:12 PM] Michael McKay: Is there a fallback you could use? Average PO, to Invoice cost, to standard cost?

[26/04/2016 2:28:46 PM] Victor Perez: if you register an material receipt AD works as expected

[26/04/2016 2:28:59 PM] Victor Perez: Standard would use

[26/04/2016 2:29:08 PM] Victor Perez: in this case take the cost from M_Cost

[26/04/2016 2:31:44 PM] Michael McKay: From a process point of view, having no PO happens all the time. For simple things that aren't controlled, there could be a standing order or people phone in an order and the material arrives. The MR and Invoices can get entered days later. (I'd even suggest for a real lack of control, we could add an AP Invoice Indirect that would create the MR automatically in the same way we do shipments on the AR side.)

[26/04/2016 2:32:12 PM] Michael McKay: For the MR, could you use the M_Cost value and then adjust it when you have more info?

[26/04/2016 2:32:44 PM] Victor Perez: but it is a not control

[26/04/2016 2:33:00 PM] Victor Perez: in this case use an inventory internal use

[26/04/2016 2:33:07 PM] Victor Perez: not an material receipt

[26/04/2016 2:33:38 PM] Victor Perez: but if this happen , from where take the cost , because not would create without zero cost

[26/04/2016 2:34:08 PM] Victor Perez: in special when the vendor invoice can take more one GL period

[26/04/2016 2:34:26 PM] Victor Perez: in old approach take the cost from product PO

[26/04/2016 2:34:41 PM] Victor Perez: or price list

[26/04/2016 2:34:47 PM] Victor Perez: but I not sure the approach

[26/04/2016 2:35:05 PM] Victor Perez: because can starting the average cost with a incorrect data

[26/04/2016 2:35:10 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Mike, I also have the same feeling that we need Material Receipt which creates PO and/or Invoice

[26/04/2016 2:35:41 PM] Trifon Trifonov: or maybe we can have Purchase Order which automatically creates Material Receipt and/or Invoice

[26/04/2016 2:36:44 PM] Michael McKay: Its a valid corner case we have to deal with. Its strange that some of the first material transactions in GardenWorld are shipments of products that haven't been received yet.

[26/04/2016 2:38:15 PM] Victor Perez: all this case the headache is for accountants and try to withstand the layers average :)

[26/04/2016 2:41:10 PM] Michael McKay: I used to work in a manufacturing plant where the shipments happened real-time but the other paper-work, including MRs, followed days later and in almost random order. At the end of the month, it all looked fine but it was not accurate minute by minute.

[26/04/2016 2:41:24 PM] Victor Perez: yes is strange because the first example not is based on in best practices

[26/04/2016 2:42:02 PM] Victor Perez: make other thing is to promote disorder :)

[26/04/2016 2:43:24 PM] Michael McKay: Its kind of kanban. Focus on what is important. If you can see your inventory, you don't need the computer to tell you that you have it, so being days late in the paperwork is OK.

[26/04/2016 2:43:55 PM] Victor Perez: would drop and make a right process

[26/04/2016 2:44:13 PM] Michael McKay: Sorry - change the GW data?

[26/04/2016 2:44:45 PM] Michael McKay: Not sure I understand your last comment.

[26/04/2016 2:45:18 PM] Victor Perez: yes

[26/04/2016 2:45:37 PM] Victor Perez: remove this material receipt and created other based on purchase order

[26/04/2016 2:45:48 PM | Edited 2:45:57 PM] Victor Perez: or insert the purchase order

[26/04/2016 2:46:02 PM] Victor Perez: for this receipts

[26/04/2016 2:49:15 PM] Michael McKay: That would be OK as well. Remember that the cost details are generated/sorted by the transaction ID, so the IDs have to be in order. I don't agree with this and think it only has to be in order of incoming then outgoing. If we can find a query to give you all the necessary info "at the end of the day", regardless of the order the documents were entered, it would work.

[26/04/2016 2:49:58 PM] Michael McKay: If you try to enter a PO for those transactions with the current code, I don't think it will work.

[26/04/2016 2:53:35 PM | Edited 2:54:05 PM] Michael McKay: Its is this bit of code I have a problem with:

In GenerateCostDetails.getTransactionIdsByDateAcct() ...

       sql.append("SELECT M_Transaction_ID , M_Product_ID FROM RV_Transaction ")
               .append(whereClause)
               .append(" ORDER BY M_Product_ID ,  TRUNC( DateAcct ) , M_Transaction_ID , SUBSTR(MovementType,2,1) ");
[26/04/2016 2:58:41 PM] Victor Perez: the transaction id and

[26/04/2016 2:58:47 PM] Victor Perez: date acct

[26/04/2016 2:59:00 PM | Edited 2:59:13 PM] Victor Perez: first set the receipt or positive

[26/04/2016 2:59:29 PM] Victor Perez: and last the of out or negative

[26/04/2016 2:59:36 PM] Victor Perez: this reason of SUBSTR(MovementType,2,1)

[26/04/2016 2:59:50 PM] Victor Perez: but I need a right average cost by day

[26/04/2016 3:00:21 PM] Victor Perez: because if not then you found the issue how should valuate of inventory with negative quantity

[26/04/2016 3:00:35 PM] Victor Perez: what should be the average cost for negative inventory

[26/04/2016 3:00:51 PM] Victor Perez: in account can show bad information how if I got an benefits

[26/04/2016 3:01:03 PM] Victor Perez: currenty an negative inventory not increase the inventory value

[26/04/2016 3:01:13 PM] Victor Perez: so that can take an bad decision

[26/04/2016 3:01:59 PM] Victor Perez: now the transaction and layer average are based on account date not in transaction date

[26/04/2016 3:02:59 PM] Michael McKay: Its just that "bad" process of material receipt and shipment being out of order in entry. At the end of the day, the documents are there but the receipt may have a higher ID than the shipment. If you ignore the Transaction ID the costs can be generated.

[26/04/2016 3:03:59 PM] Michael McKay: Again, we are arguing a corner case - something that is not normal and perhaps we should state that garbage in gets garbage out if people follow this process.

[26/04/2016 3:04:31 PM] Michael McKay: But I still think we should be able to recover at the end of the day.

[26/04/2016 3:05:17 PM] Michael McKay: Sorry - but I have to step away again. More later.

[26/04/2016 3:10:46 PM] Victor Perez: The big issue is the reversal trx

[26/04/2016 3:12:25 PM] Victor Perez: For same day

[26/04/2016 3:13:27 PM] Victor Perez: This unique way the reverse of trx

[26/04/2016 3:13:41 PM] Victor Perez: And revertir the layer cost

[26/04/2016 3:21:56 PM] Trifon Trifonov: @Victor, best solution which I have found is to save cost in the shipment line, and when Customer Return is entered to read the cost from the shipment line.

[26/04/2016 4:21:12 PM] Victor Perez: not is posible because you can have multiples type cost

[26/04/2016 4:21:15 PM] Victor Perez: and elements

[26/04/2016 5:31:44 PM] Victor Perez: Can voting to remove Posterita code and options menus?