You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com> on 2017/10/13 08:44:30 UTC

Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Hello,

While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is created and
successfully gets updated after completing inventory transfer.
As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity anywhere
in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only available on the newly
created inventory item. Problem is, it gets deluded on time being and user
won't get exact quantity for which inventory transfer was initialized.

IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer *entity
as well for proper history maintenance of records.

Please share your thoughts on this.

--
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

Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

+1 to introduce "quantity" attribute in InventoryTransfer entity. Please
create a JIRA for this as well.

Thanks & Regards
--

Vaibhav Jain
Hotwax Systems,
vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Suraj Khurana <
suraj.khurana@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is created and
> successfully gets updated after completing inventory transfer.
> As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity anywhere
> in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only available on the newly
> created inventory item. Problem is, it gets deluded on time being and user
> won't get exact quantity for which inventory transfer was initialized.
>
> IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer *entity
> as well for proper history maintenance of records.
>
> Please share your thoughts on this.
>
> --
> 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
>

RE: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

James,

There is inherent & conceptual difference between Inventory transfer and
Orders for any given business and hence it would better serve to first do
proper due diligence. I would try to share few pointers on other thread if
that can facilitate in any which way.



Thanks,

Swapnil



-----Original Message-----
From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:22 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records



Hi Swapnil,



Thanks for explaining the business case for associating Shipment and
Inventory Transfer.

Good we have common agreement on using Inventory Transfer Header entity to
manage group transfer.

For Inventory Transfer that involves Shipment, the approach by Vaibhav to
reuse the Shipment to Order relation seems easier. So I will share my
thoughts on Vaibhav's reply next.



Best Regards,

James Yong



On 2017-10-17 02:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> Hi James,

> As per the very nature of any business establishment, generally

> Manufacturing Facilities or Distribution Centers(warehouses) or Stores

> (which we term as facilities) of a single business entity are located

> at different geographical areas. Any kind of stock movement across

> these facilities needs to be shipped thorough preferred choice of

> carrier or mode and hence the shipment association with Inventory

> Transfer could be helpful. Any outbound shipment from originating

> facility should be receivable at destination facility as inbound shipment.

>

> Thanks,

> Swapnil

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]

> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 9:26 PM

> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

>

> Hi Swapnil,

>

> Shipment is currently used for Delivery and Goods Inwards.

> Why would you want a Shipment for Inventory Transfer?

>

> Regards,

> James Yong

>

> On 2017-10-16 21:32, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> > Yes James,

> > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with

> > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer

> > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data
integrity.

> > Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through

> > ITH itself or a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.

> >

> > Thanks & Regards,

> > Swapnil

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]

> > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM

> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> >

> > Hi Swapnil,

> >

> > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.

> > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info

> > related to the group transfer.

> > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will

> > contain a FK to ITH.

> > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.

> >

> > Regards,

> > James Yong

> >

> > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>

> wrote:

> > > Folks,

> > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer

> > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for

> > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment

> > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.

> > >

> > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory

> > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one
product).

> > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing

> > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a

> > > single transfer

> > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having

> > > InventoryTransferId

> > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well.

> > > + Of

> > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.

> > >

> > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and

> > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.

> > >

> > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > Swapnil

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]

> > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM

> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> > >

> > > Hi all,

> > >

> > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item

> > > Detail

> > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory

> > > Transfer table.

> > >

> > > What do you think?

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > James Yong

> > >

> > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> > > > Hi Suraj,

> > > >

> > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail

> > table?

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > James Yong

> > > >

> > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana

> > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > Hello,

> > > > >

> > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is

> > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing

> > > > > inventory

> > transfer.

> > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred

> > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity

> > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. Problem

> > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact

> > > > > quantity for which

> > > inventory transfer was initialized.

> > > > >

> > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at

> > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history

> > > > > maintenance

> of records.

> > > > >

> > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.

> > > > >

> > > > > --

> > > > > 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

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi Swapnil,

Thanks for explaining the business case for associating Shipment and Inventory Transfer.
Good we have common agreement on using Inventory Transfer Header entity to manage group transfer.
For Inventory Transfer that involves Shipment, the approach by Vaibhav to reuse the Shipment to Order relation seems easier. So I will share my thoughts on Vaibhav's reply next.

Best Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-17 02:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Hi James,
> As per the very nature of any business establishment, generally
> Manufacturing Facilities or Distribution Centers(warehouses) or Stores
> (which we term as facilities) of a single business entity are located at
> different geographical areas. Any kind of stock movement across these
> facilities needs to be shipped thorough preferred choice of carrier or
> mode and hence the shipment association with Inventory Transfer could be
> helpful. Any outbound shipment from originating facility should be
> receivable at destination facility as inbound shipment.
> 
> Thanks,
> Swapnil
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 9:26 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> Hi Swapnil,
> 
> Shipment is currently used for Delivery and Goods Inwards.
> Why would you want a Shipment for Inventory Transfer?
> 
> Regards,
> James Yong
> 
> On 2017-10-16 21:32, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > Yes James,
> > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer create
> > corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data integrity.
> > Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through ITH
> > itself or a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Swapnil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > Hi Swapnil,
> >
> > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> > related to the group transfer.
> > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will
> > contain a FK to ITH.
> > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > > Folks,
> > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment
> > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> > >
> > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer
> > > can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product).
> > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing
> > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a
> > > single transfer
> > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> > > InventoryTransferId
> > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of
> > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> > >
> > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then
> > > we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > Swapnil
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> > > Detail
> > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> > > Transfer table.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James Yong
> > >
> > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Hi Suraj,
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> > table?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing inventory
> > transfer.
> > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred
> > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is
> > > > > only available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is,
> > > > > it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity
> > > > > for which
> > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > > > >
> > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history maintenance
> of records.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Hi James,
As per the very nature of any business establishment, generally
Manufacturing Facilities or Distribution Centers(warehouses) or Stores
(which we term as facilities) of a single business entity are located at
different geographical areas. Any kind of stock movement across these
facilities needs to be shipped thorough preferred choice of carrier or
mode and hence the shipment association with Inventory Transfer could be
helpful. Any outbound shipment from originating facility should be
receivable at destination facility as inbound shipment.

Thanks,
Swapnil


-----Original Message-----
From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 9:26 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Hi Swapnil,

Shipment is currently used for Delivery and Goods Inwards.
Why would you want a Shipment for Inventory Transfer?

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-16 21:32, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> Yes James,
> ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer create
> corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data integrity.
> Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through ITH
> itself or a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Swapnil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>
> Hi Swapnil,
>
> Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> related to the group transfer.
> For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will
> contain a FK to ITH.
> For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
>
> Regards,
> James Yong
>
> On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:
> > Folks,
> > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment
> > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >
> > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer
> > can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product).
> > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing
> > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a
> > single transfer
> > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> > InventoryTransferId
> > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of
> > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> >
> > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then
> > we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Swapnil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> > Detail
> > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> > Transfer table.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Suraj,
> > >
> > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> table?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James Yong
> > >
> > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing inventory
> transfer.
> > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred
> > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is
> > > > only available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is,
> > > > it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity
> > > > for which
> > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > > >
> > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history maintenance
of records.
> > > >
> > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi Swapnil,

Shipment is currently used for Delivery and Goods Inwards. 
Why would you want a Shipment for Inventory Transfer?

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-16 21:32, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Yes James,
> ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer create
> corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data integrity. Also,
> We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through ITH itself or
> a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Swapnil
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> Hi Swapnil,
> 
> Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> related to the group transfer.
> For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will contain
> a FK to ITH.
> For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> 
> Regards,
> James Yong
> 
> On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > Folks,
> > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment against
> > transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >
> > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer
> > can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product).
> > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing design
> > such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a single
> > transfer
> > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having InventoryTransferId
> > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of
> > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> >
> > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then we
> > can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Swapnil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> > Detail
> > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> > Transfer table.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Suraj,
> > >
> > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> table?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James Yong
> > >
> > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing inventory
> transfer.
> > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity
> > > > anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only
> > > > available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is, it gets
> > > > deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity for which
> > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > > >
> > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer
> > > > *entity as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> > > >
> > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Yashwant Dhakad <ya...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

My vote is for Approach#1.

Thanks & Regards
--
Yashwant Dhakad
HotWax Systems
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 9:55 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> My vote is for Design Approach #1
>
> Can consider having the additional modifications:
>
> 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory
> transfer with shipment.
>
> 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
>
> Regards,
> James Yong
>
> On 2018/04/24 08:20:44, Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365<
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>.
> >
> > --
> > Thanks and Regards,
> >
> > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> Indore,
> > M.P, India - 452010
> > Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma <
> pawan.verma@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this
> improvement
> > > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>.
> We
> > > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks and Regards,
> > >
> > > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> > > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> > > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> > > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> > > Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> > > Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma <
> > > pawan.verma@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello All,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs.
> > >>
> > >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the
> ticket
> > >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the
> task.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Thanks and Regards,
> > >>
> > >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> > >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> > >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> > >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> > >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> > >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and
> > >>> protocols
> > >>> is a widely accepted solution.
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards
> > >>>
> > >>> Pierre
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions.
> > >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering
> flow
> > >>> lead
> > >>> > to
> > >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong
> preference
> > >>> to use
> > >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the
> > >>> discussed
> > >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to
> maintain
> > >>> and
> > >>> > most
> > >>> > > flexible way.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then
> > >>> let's
> > >>> > cut a
> > >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Thanks,
> > >>> > > Swapnil
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
> > >>> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > >>> records
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Hi all,
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches
> (with or
> > >>> > without
> > >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for
> inventory
> > >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and
> > >>> Purchase
> > >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand
> > >>> inventory
> > >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
> > >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Regards,
> > >>> > > James Yong
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.
> com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single
> shipment
> > >>> that
> > >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility
> as a
> > >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take
> Order
> > >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order
> type
> > >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new
> > >>> Shipment
> > >>> > > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs
> processed
> > >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment.
> > >>> > > > What it would mean is that:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
> > >>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
> > >>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From
> > >>> Vendorâ€™
> > >>> > and
> > >>> > > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both
> > >>> originating
> > >>> > and
> > >>> > > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company
> or
> > >>> > business
> > >>> > > >    entity).
> > >>> > > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO
> items
> > >>> > (even
> > >>> > > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
> > >>> > > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination
> RO
> > >>> in a
> > >>> > > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
> > >>> > > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility
> > >>> then
> > >>> > move
> > >>> > > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s
> > >>> status
> > >>> > can
> > >>> > > > also be
> > >>> > > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to
> the
> > >>> tune
> > >>> > of
> > >>> > > > shipped
> > >>> > > >    units.
> > >>> > > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable)
> against
> > >>> > linked
> > >>> > > >    RO.
> > >>> > > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the
> > >>> â€˜Shippedâ€™ RO
> > >>> > > > (similar to
> > >>> > > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer
> Shipment
> > >>> that
> > >>> > was
> > >>> > > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On
> > >>> hand to
> > >>> > > > the
> > >>> > > >    tune of received units.
> > >>> > > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the
> > >>> shipment
> > >>> > to
> > >>> > > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can
> also
> > >>> be
> > >>> > > > marked as
> > >>> > > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
> > >>> > > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting
> in the
> > >>> > > > process
> > >>> > > >    wherever needed.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against
> > >>> other
> > >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks
> > >>> over
> > >>> > > > complicated.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Thanks,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Swapnil
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> > >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> > >>> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > >>> records
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Hello All,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate
> data
> > >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for
> > >>> inventory
> > >>> > > > transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated
> PO
> > >>> for
> > >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using
> > >>> sales/purchase
> > >>> > > > order.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> > >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model
> instead of
> > >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify
> that
> > >>> > > > order is
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are
> > >>> same).
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in
> OrderStatus
> > >>> > > > entity.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple
> > >>> products
> > >>> > > > at a
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    time.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order
> data
> > >>> model.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock
> transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> > >>> > > > inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >    transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Thanks & Regards
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > --
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Hotwax Systems,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <
> jamesyong@apache.org>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns
> (i.e.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> > >>> > > > > inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > transfer with shipment.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> > >>> > > > > discussed
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > earlier)
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > James Yong
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <
> swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.co
> > >>> m>
> > >>> > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to
> > >>> stock
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > transfer flow.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement
> > >>> i.e.,
> > >>> > > > > > so
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business
> > >>> entity.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any
> kind of
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to
> > >>> current
> > >>> > > > implementation) :
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods
> exchange
> > >>> but
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > there
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > is
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> > >>> > > > > > receiver
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > as
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > they
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal
> sense.
> > >>> So
> > >>> > > > business
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any
> sales
> > >>> or
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > purchase
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any
> > >>> real
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > time
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > payment
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> > >>> > > > > > applicability
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > country/state-specific
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > tax
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    regulations. For example:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain
> state
> > >>> > > > > > might be
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or
> taxed at
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > different rate in
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or
> EUR
> > >>> tax
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > regulations can
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently
> > >>> intra-company
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > goods transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       are even taxable or not)
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> > >>> > > > > > transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > is
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > now
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability
> > >>> and in
> > >>> > > > > > this
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to
> be
> > >>> > > > > > issued
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > along
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document
> > >>> (depending on
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > the inter-state
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
> > >>> having
> > >>> > > > > > single
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving
> branches
> > >>> with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice
> *needs
> > >>> to be
> > >>> > > > issue.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the
> > >>> goods.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
> > >>> having
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > different
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving
> branches
> > >>> with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate
> > >>> â€œTax
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > Invoiceâ€ *
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be
> paid to
> > >>> > > > > > the
> > >>> > > > state
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be
> generated in
> > >>> > > > > > this
> > >>> > > > case.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> > >>> > > > > > transitioning
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™
> > >>> (from
> > >>> > > > > > originating
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > facility) Ã
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination
> > >>> facility).
> > >>> > > > > > As it needs to
> > >>> > > > be
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    tracked internally.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability
> against the
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > transferred
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against
> appropriate GL
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > accounts
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > per
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax
> authority
> > >>> (in
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > accordance
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    with business rules).
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to
> > >>> systemically
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > build
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > the
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> > >>> > > > > > individual
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned
> requests/requirement
> > >>> > > > > > for
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > a
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > common
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > implemented)
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough
> solution
> > >>> > > > > > that
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of
> flexibility.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Thanks,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Swapnil
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > >>> > > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > >>> records
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> > >>> > > > > > mentioned
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > earlier
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is
> > >>> reasonable
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > since
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > we
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option
> to
> > >>> > > > > > enable
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > shipment.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> > >>> > > > > > selected,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO)
> will
> > >>> be
> > >>> > > > created.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these
> transfer
> > >>> SO &
> > >>> > PO.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO.
> Changes can
> > >>> > > > > > only
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer
> entities.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function
> of SO
> > >>> to
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > James Yong
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <
> > >>> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in
> Business
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Requirements
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > like:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more
> than one
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > product
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > in
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > >>> > > > > > > Shipment
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > which is
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    missing.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Accounting
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > which
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    is missing.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after
> > >>> GST) on
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock
> transferring"
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > documentation.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer,
> driver)
> > >>> > > > > > > with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > the
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >    respective transfer order.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to
> > >>> Order
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create
> a
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > "Transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product".
> > >>> Business
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > does
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e.
> PO
> > >>> > > > > > > should
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > be
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to
> surpass
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > > > > PO
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive
> > >>> product"
> > >>> > > > > > > is
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a
> flow of
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive
> > >>> Product"
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > workflow.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Yes James,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly
> coupled
> > >>> > > > > > > > with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> > >>> > > > > > > > transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to
> maintain
> > >>> > > > > > > > data
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer
> > >>> with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >]
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory
> transfer
> > >>> > > > > > > > records
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity,
> e.g.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or
> > >>> common
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > info
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each
> > >>> InventoryTransfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > will
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > James Yong
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Folks,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that
> any
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is
> > >>> generally
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > for
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> > >>> > > > > > > > > shipment
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given
> > >>> inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and
> hence
> > >>> > > > > > > > > only
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > one
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > product).
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> > >>> > > > > > > > > existing
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be
> tied
> > >>> > > > > > > > > with
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > a
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up
> with it
> > >>> as
> > >>> > > > > > > > > well.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > + Of
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> > >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> > >>> > > > etc.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business
> > >>> cases
> > >>> > > > > > > > > and
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic
> enough.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > >>> records
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to
> > >>> Inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Item
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Detail
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to
> the
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<
> jamesyong@apache.org>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at
> Inventory
> > >>> Item
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > table?
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new
> inventory
> > >>> item
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after
> > >>> completing
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > transfer.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity
> and
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory
> > >>> item.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't
> get
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper
> history
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > maintenance
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > of records.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > 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
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>> --
> > >>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>
> > >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> > >>> OFBiz based solutions & services
> > >>>
> > >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi all,

My vote is for Design Approach #1

Can consider having the additional modifications:

1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory transfer with shipment.

2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax. 

Regards,
James Yong

On 2018/04/24 08:20:44, Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>.
> 
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
> 
> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore,
> M.P, India - 452010
> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> 
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement
> > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We
> > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task.
> >
> > --
> > Thanks and Regards,
> >
> > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> > Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> > Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma <
> > pawan.verma@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello All,
> >>
> >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs.
> >>
> >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket
> >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks and Regards,
> >>
> >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and
> >>> protocols
> >>> is a widely accepted solution.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards
> >>>
> >>> Pierre
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
> >>> >
> >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions.
> >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow
> >>> lead
> >>> > to
> >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference
> >>> to use
> >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the
> >>> discussed
> >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain
> >>> and
> >>> > most
> >>> > > flexible way.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then
> >>> let's
> >>> > cut a
> >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Thanks,
> >>> > > Swapnil
> >>> > >
> >>> > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
> >>> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Hi all,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or
> >>> > without
> >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
> >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and
> >>> Purchase
> >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand
> >>> inventory
> >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
> >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Regards,
> >>> > > James Yong
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment
> >>> that
> >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
> >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
> >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
> >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new
> >>> Shipment
> >>> > > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs processed
> >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment.
> >>> > > > What it would mean is that:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
> >>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
> >>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From
> >>> Vendorâ€™
> >>> > and
> >>> > > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both
> >>> originating
> >>> > and
> >>> > > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or
> >>> > business
> >>> > > >    entity).
> >>> > > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items
> >>> > (even
> >>> > > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
> >>> > > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO
> >>> in a
> >>> > > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
> >>> > > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility
> >>> then
> >>> > move
> >>> > > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s
> >>> status
> >>> > can
> >>> > > > also be
> >>> > > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the
> >>> tune
> >>> > of
> >>> > > > shipped
> >>> > > >    units.
> >>> > > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against
> >>> > linked
> >>> > > >    RO.
> >>> > > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the
> >>> â€˜Shippedâ€™ RO
> >>> > > > (similar to
> >>> > > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment
> >>> that
> >>> > was
> >>> > > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On
> >>> hand to
> >>> > > > the
> >>> > > >    tune of received units.
> >>> > > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the
> >>> shipment
> >>> > to
> >>> > > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also
> >>> be
> >>> > > > marked as
> >>> > > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
> >>> > > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
> >>> > > > process
> >>> > > >    wherever needed.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against
> >>> other
> >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks
> >>> over
> >>> > > > complicated.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> >>> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Hello All,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
> >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for
> >>> inventory
> >>> > > > transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO
> >>> for
> >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using
> >>> sales/purchase
> >>> > > > order.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
> >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
> >>> > > > order is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are
> >>> same).
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
> >>> > > > entity.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple
> >>> products
> >>> > > > at a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    time.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data
> >>> model.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> >>> > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks & Regards
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > --
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Hotwax Systems,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> >>> > > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > transfer with shipment.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> >>> > > > > discussed
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > earlier)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.co
> >>> m>
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to
> >>> stock
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > transfer flow.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement
> >>> i.e.,
> >>> > > > > > so
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business
> >>> entity.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to
> >>> current
> >>> > > > implementation) :
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange
> >>> but
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > there
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> >>> > > > > > receiver
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > as
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > they
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense.
> >>> So
> >>> > > > business
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales
> >>> or
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > purchase
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any
> >>> real
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > time
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > payment
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> >>> > > > > > applicability
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > country/state-specific
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > tax
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    regulations. For example:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
> >>> > > > > > might be
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > different rate in
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR
> >>> tax
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > regulations can
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently
> >>> intra-company
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > goods transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       are even taxable or not)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> >>> > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > now
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability
> >>> and in
> >>> > > > > > this
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
> >>> > > > > > issued
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > along
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document
> >>> (depending on
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > the inter-state
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
> >>> having
> >>> > > > > > single
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
> >>> with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs
> >>> to be
> >>> > > > issue.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the
> >>> goods.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
> >>> having
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > different
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
> >>> with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate
> >>> â€œTax
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Invoiceâ€ *
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
> >>> > > > > > the
> >>> > > > state
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
> >>> > > > > > this
> >>> > > > case.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> >>> > > > > > transitioning
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™
> >>> (from
> >>> > > > > > originating
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > facility) Ã
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination
> >>> facility).
> >>> > > > > > As it needs to
> >>> > > > be
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    tracked internally.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > transferred
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > accounts
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > per
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority
> >>> (in
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > accordance
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    with business rules).
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to
> >>> systemically
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > build
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> >>> > > > > > individual
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
> >>> > > > > > for
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > common
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > implemented)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
> >>> > > > > > that
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Thanks,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> >>> > > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> >>> > > > > > mentioned
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > earlier
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is
> >>> reasonable
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > since
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > we
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
> >>> > > > > > enable
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > shipment.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> >>> > > > > > selected,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will
> >>> be
> >>> > > > created.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer
> >>> SO &
> >>> > PO.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
> >>> > > > > > only
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO
> >>> to
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <
> >>> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Requirements
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > like:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > product
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > in
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> >>> > > > > > > Shipment
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > which is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    missing.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Accounting
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > which
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    is missing.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after
> >>> GST) on
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > documentation.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
> >>> > > > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    respective transfer order.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to
> >>> Order
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > "Transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product".
> >>> Business
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > does
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
> >>> > > > > > > should
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > be
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass
> >>> the
> >>> > > > > > > PO
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive
> >>> product"
> >>> > > > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive
> >>> Product"
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > workflow.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Yes James,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
> >>> > > > > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> >>> > > > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
> >>> > > > > > > > data
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer
> >>> with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> > > > > > > > records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or
> >>> common
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > info
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each
> >>> InventoryTransfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > will
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Folks,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is
> >>> generally
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > for
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> >>> > > > > > > > > shipment
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given
> >>> inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
> >>> > > > > > > > > only
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > one
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > product).
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> >>> > > > > > > > > existing
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
> >>> > > > > > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it
> >>> as
> >>> > > > > > > > > well.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > + Of
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> >>> > > > etc.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business
> >>> cases
> >>> > > > > > > > > and
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to
> >>> Inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Item
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Detail
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory
> >>> Item
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > table?
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory
> >>> item
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after
> >>> completing
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory
> >>> item.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > maintenance
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > of records.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > --
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > 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
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> --
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>>
> >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> >>> OFBiz based solutions & services
> >>>
> >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Hello Pawan,

Inventory transfer is a type of order. So, IMO instead of introducing a new
data model for inventory transfer, we should use Order data model.

+1 for Design approach #3

Thanks & Regards

Vaibhav Jain
Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Systems
m: 782-834-1900 e: vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:

> Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>.
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> Indore,
> M.P, India - 452010
> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma <
> pawan.verma@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement
> > at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We
> > can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task.
> >
> > --
> > Thanks and Regards,
> >
> > *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> > HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> > <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> > Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> > Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma <
> > pawan.verma@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello All,
> >>
> >> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs.
> >>
> >> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket
> >> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks and Regards,
> >>
> >> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> >> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> >> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> >> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> >> Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> >> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and
> >>> protocols
> >>> is a widely accepted solution.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards
> >>>
> >>> Pierre
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
> >>> >
> >>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > > Thanks all your suggestions.
> >>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow
> >>> lead
> >>> > to
> >>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference
> >>> to use
> >>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the
> >>> discussed
> >>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain
> >>> and
> >>> > most
> >>> > > flexible way.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then
> >>> let's
> >>> > cut a
> >>> > > JIRA to proceed with it.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Thanks,
> >>> > > Swapnil
> >>> > >
> >>> > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
> >>> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Hi all,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with
> or
> >>> > without
> >>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for
> inventory
> >>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and
> >>> Purchase
> >>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand
> >>> inventory
> >>> > > transfer functionalities in the future.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
> >>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Regards,
> >>> > > James Yong
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment
> >>> that
> >>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as
> a
> >>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take
> Order
> >>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order
> type
> >>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new
> >>> Shipment
> >>> > > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs
> processed
> >>> > > > through this single transfer shipment.
> >>> > > > What it would mean is that:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
> >>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
> >>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From
> >>> Vendorâ€™
> >>> > and
> >>> > > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both
> >>> originating
> >>> > and
> >>> > > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or
> >>> > business
> >>> > > >    entity).
> >>> > > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO
> items
> >>> > (even
> >>> > > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
> >>> > > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO
> >>> in a
> >>> > > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
> >>> > > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility
> >>> then
> >>> > move
> >>> > > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s
> >>> status
> >>> > can
> >>> > > > also be
> >>> > > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the
> >>> tune
> >>> > of
> >>> > > > shipped
> >>> > > >    units.
> >>> > > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable)
> against
> >>> > linked
> >>> > > >    RO.
> >>> > > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the
> >>> â€˜Shippedâ€™ RO
> >>> > > > (similar to
> >>> > > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment
> >>> that
> >>> > was
> >>> > > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On
> >>> hand to
> >>> > > > the
> >>> > > >    tune of received units.
> >>> > > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the
> >>> shipment
> >>> > to
> >>> > > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also
> >>> be
> >>> > > > marked as
> >>> > > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
> >>> > > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in
> the
> >>> > > > process
> >>> > > >    wherever needed.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against
> >>> other
> >>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks
> >>> over
> >>> > > > complicated.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> >>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> >>> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Hello All,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks James for the reply.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate
> data
> >>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for
> >>> inventory
> >>> > > > transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO
> >>> for
> >>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using
> >>> sales/purchase
> >>> > > > order.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> >>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead
> of
> >>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify
> that
> >>> > > > order is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are
> >>> same).
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in
> OrderStatus
> >>> > > > entity.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple
> >>> products
> >>> > > > at a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    time.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data
> >>> model.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock
> transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> >>> > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >    transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Thanks & Regards
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > --
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Vaibhav Jain
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Hotwax Systems,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <
> jamesyong@apache.org>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> >>> > > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > transfer with shipment.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> >>> > > > > discussed
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > earlier)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <
> swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.co
> >>> m>
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to
> >>> stock
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > transfer flow.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement
> >>> i.e.,
> >>> > > > > > so
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business
> >>> entity.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind
> of
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to
> >>> current
> >>> > > > implementation) :
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods
> exchange
> >>> but
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > there
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> >>> > > > > > receiver
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > as
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > they
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense.
> >>> So
> >>> > > > business
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any
> sales
> >>> or
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > purchase
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any
> >>> real
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > time
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > payment
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> >>> > > > > > applicability
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > country/state-specific
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > tax
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    regulations. For example:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
> >>> > > > > > might be
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed
> at
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > different rate in
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR
> >>> tax
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > regulations can
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently
> >>> intra-company
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > goods transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       are even taxable or not)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> >>> > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > now
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability
> >>> and in
> >>> > > > > > this
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
> >>> > > > > > issued
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > along
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document
> >>> (depending on
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > the inter-state
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
> >>> having
> >>> > > > > > single
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
> >>> with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs
> >>> to be
> >>> > > > issue.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the
> >>> goods.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
> >>> having
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > different
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
> >>> with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate
> >>> â€œTax
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Invoiceâ€ *
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid
> to
> >>> > > > > > the
> >>> > > > state
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated
> in
> >>> > > > > > this
> >>> > > > case.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> >>> > > > > > transitioning
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™
> >>> (from
> >>> > > > > > originating
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > facility) Ã
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination
> >>> facility).
> >>> > > > > > As it needs to
> >>> > > > be
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    tracked internally.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against
> the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > transferred
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate
> GL
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > accounts
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > per
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority
> >>> (in
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > accordance
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    with business rules).
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to
> >>> systemically
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > build
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> >>> > > > > > individual
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned
> requests/requirement
> >>> > > > > > for
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > common
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > implemented)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough
> solution
> >>> > > > > > that
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of
> flexibility.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Thanks,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> >>> > > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> >>> > > > > > mentioned
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > earlier
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > to manage group transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is
> >>> reasonable
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > since
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > we
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
> >>> > > > > > enable
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > shipment.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> >>> > > > > > selected,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will
> >>> be
> >>> > > > created.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer
> >>> SO &
> >>> > PO.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes
> can
> >>> > > > > > only
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer
> entities.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of
> SO
> >>> to
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <
> >>> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in
> Business
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Requirements
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > like:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than
> one
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > product
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > in
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> >>> > > > > > > Shipment
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > which is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    missing.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Accounting
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > which
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    is missing.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after
> >>> GST) on
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > documentation.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer,
> driver)
> >>> > > > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >    respective transfer order.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to
> >>> Order
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > "Transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product".
> >>> Business
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > does
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
> >>> > > > > > > should
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > be
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass
> >>> the
> >>> > > > > > > PO
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive
> >>> product"
> >>> > > > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow
> of
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive
> >>> Product"
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > workflow.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Yes James,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly
> coupled
> >>> > > > > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> >>> > > > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to
> maintain
> >>> > > > > > > > data
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer
> >>> with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> > > > > > > > records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity,
> e.g.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or
> >>> common
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > info
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each
> >>> InventoryTransfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > will
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Folks,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that
> any
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is
> >>> generally
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > for
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> >>> > > > > > > > > shipment
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given
> >>> inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and
> hence
> >>> > > > > > > > > only
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > one
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > product).
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> >>> > > > > > > > > existing
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be
> tied
> >>> > > > > > > > > with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > a
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > single transfer
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with
> it
> >>> as
> >>> > > > > > > > > well.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > + Of
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> >>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> >>> > > > etc.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business
> >>> cases
> >>> > > > > > > > > and
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> >>> records
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to
> >>> Inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Item
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Detail
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to
> the
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<jamesyong@apache.org
> >
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory
> >>> Item
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Detail
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > table?
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory
> >>> item
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > is
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after
> >>> completing
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > transfer.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory
> >>> item.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't
> get
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > exact
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper
> history
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > maintenance
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > of records.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > --
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > > 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
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> --
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>>
> >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> >>> OFBiz based solutions & services
> >>>
> >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> >>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Here is the right link for the subtask OFBIZ-10365<
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10365>.

--
Thanks and Regards,

*Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
<http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore,
M.P, India - 452010
Cell phone: +91 9977705687

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement
> at subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We
> can discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task.
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma <
> pawan.verma@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs.
>>
>> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket
>> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks and Regards,
>>
>> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
>> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
>> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
>> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
>> Indore, M.P, India - 452010
>> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and
>>> protocols
>>> is a widely accepted solution.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
>>> >
>>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > > Thanks all your suggestions.
>>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow
>>> lead
>>> > to
>>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference
>>> to use
>>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the
>>> discussed
>>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain
>>> and
>>> > most
>>> > > flexible way.
>>> > >
>>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then
>>> let's
>>> > cut a
>>> > > JIRA to proceed with it.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > > Swapnil
>>> > >
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
>>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
>>> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>>> records
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi all,
>>> > >
>>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or
>>> > without
>>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
>>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and
>>> Purchase
>>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand
>>> inventory
>>> > > transfer functionalities in the future.
>>> > >
>>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
>>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
>>> > >
>>> > > Regards,
>>> > > James Yong
>>> > >
>>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment
>>> that
>>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
>>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
>>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
>>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new
>>> Shipment
>>> > > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs processed
>>> > > > through this single transfer shipment.
>>> > > > What it would mean is that:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
>>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
>>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From
>>> Vendorâ€™
>>> > and
>>> > > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both
>>> originating
>>> > and
>>> > > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or
>>> > business
>>> > > >    entity).
>>> > > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items
>>> > (even
>>> > > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
>>> > > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO
>>> in a
>>> > > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
>>> > > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility
>>> then
>>> > move
>>> > > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s
>>> status
>>> > can
>>> > > > also be
>>> > > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the
>>> tune
>>> > of
>>> > > > shipped
>>> > > >    units.
>>> > > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against
>>> > linked
>>> > > >    RO.
>>> > > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the
>>> â€˜Shippedâ€™ RO
>>> > > > (similar to
>>> > > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment
>>> that
>>> > was
>>> > > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On
>>> hand to
>>> > > > the
>>> > > >    tune of received units.
>>> > > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the
>>> shipment
>>> > to
>>> > > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also
>>> be
>>> > > > marked as
>>> > > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
>>> > > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
>>> > > > process
>>> > > >    wherever needed.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against
>>> other
>>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks
>>> over
>>> > > > complicated.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Swapnil
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
>>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
>>> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>>> records
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hello All,
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks James for the reply.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
>>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for
>>> inventory
>>> > > > transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO
>>> for
>>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using
>>> sales/purchase
>>> > > > order.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
>>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
>>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
>>> > > > order is
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are
>>> same).
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
>>> > > > entity.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple
>>> products
>>> > > > at a
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    time.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data
>>> model.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
>>> > > > inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > >    transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Vaibhav Jain
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hotwax Systems,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
>>> > > > > inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > transfer with shipment.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
>>> > > > > discussed
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > earlier)
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > James Yong
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.co
>>> m>
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to
>>> stock
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > transfer flow.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement
>>> i.e.,
>>> > > > > > so
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business
>>> entity.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to
>>> current
>>> > > > implementation) :
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange
>>> but
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > there
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > is
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
>>> > > > > > receiver
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > as
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > they
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense.
>>> So
>>> > > > business
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales
>>> or
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > purchase
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any
>>> real
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > time
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > payment
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
>>> > > > > > applicability
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > country/state-specific
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > tax
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    regulations. For example:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
>>> > > > > > might be
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > different rate in
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR
>>> tax
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > regulations can
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently
>>> intra-company
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > goods transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       are even taxable or not)
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
>>> > > > > > transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > is
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > now
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability
>>> and in
>>> > > > > > this
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
>>> > > > > > issued
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > along
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document
>>> (depending on
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > the inter-state
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
>>> having
>>> > > > > > single
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
>>> with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs
>>> to be
>>> > > > issue.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the
>>> goods.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
>>> having
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > different
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
>>> with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate
>>> â€œTax
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Invoiceâ€ *
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
>>> > > > > > the
>>> > > > state
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
>>> > > > > > this
>>> > > > case.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
>>> > > > > > transitioning
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™
>>> (from
>>> > > > > > originating
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > facility) Ã
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination
>>> facility).
>>> > > > > > As it needs to
>>> > > > be
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    tracked internally.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > transferred
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > accounts
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > per
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority
>>> (in
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > accordance
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    with business rules).
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to
>>> systemically
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > build
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > the
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
>>> > > > > > individual
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
>>> > > > > > for
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > a
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > common
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > implemented)
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
>>> > > > > > that
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Thanks,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Swapnil
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
>>> > > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>>> records
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
>>> > > > > > mentioned
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > earlier
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > to manage group transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is
>>> reasonable
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > since
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > we
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
>>> > > > > > enable
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > shipment.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
>>> > > > > > selected,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will
>>> be
>>> > > > created.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer
>>> SO &
>>> > PO.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
>>> > > > > > only
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO
>>> to
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > James Yong
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <
>>> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com>
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Requirements
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > like:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > product
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > in
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
>>> > > > > > > Shipment
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > which is
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    missing.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Accounting
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > which
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    is missing.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after
>>> GST) on
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > documentation.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
>>> > > > > > > with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > the
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >    respective transfer order.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to
>>> Order
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > "Transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product".
>>> Business
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > does
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
>>> > > > > > > should
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > be
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass
>>> the
>>> > > > > > > PO
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive
>>> product"
>>> > > > > > > is
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive
>>> Product"
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > workflow.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Yes James,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
>>> > > > > > > > with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
>>> > > > > > > > transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
>>> > > > > > > > data
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer
>>> with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Swapnil
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >]
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>>> > > > > > > > records
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or
>>> common
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > info
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each
>>> InventoryTransfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > will
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > James Yong
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Folks,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is
>>> generally
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > for
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
>>> > > > > > > > > shipment
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given
>>> inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
>>> > > > > > > > > only
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > one
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > product).
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
>>> > > > > > > > > existing
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
>>> > > > > > > > > with
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > a
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > single transfer
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it
>>> as
>>> > > > > > > > > well.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > + Of
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
>>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
>>> > > > etc.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business
>>> cases
>>> > > > > > > > > and
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>>> records
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to
>>> Inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Item
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Detail
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > James Yong
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory
>>> Item
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > Detail
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > table?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory
>>> item
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > is
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after
>>> completing
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > transfer.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
>>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory
>>> item.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
>>> > > > > > > > > > > exact
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > maintenance
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > of records.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > --
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > 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
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> --
>>> Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
>>> OFBiz based solutions & services
>>>
>>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
>>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Hello All,

I have added possible 4 different Design approaches for this improvement at
subtask OFBIZ-10365<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/10365>. We can
discuss on this and finalize best possible approach for this task.

--
Thanks and Regards,

*Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
<http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore,
M.P, India - 452010
Cell phone: +91 9977705687

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs.
>
> Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket
> created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task.
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> Indore, M.P, India - 452010
> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
>
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and protocols
>> is a widely accepted solution.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
>> >
>> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > Thanks all your suggestions.
>> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow
>> lead
>> > to
>> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to
>> use
>> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the
>> discussed
>> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain
>> and
>> > most
>> > > flexible way.
>> > >
>> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's
>> > cut a
>> > > JIRA to proceed with it.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Swapnil
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
>> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>> records
>> > >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or
>> > without
>> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
>> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase
>> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory
>> > > transfer functionalities in the future.
>> > >
>> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
>> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > James Yong
>> > >
>> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment
>> that
>> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
>> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
>> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
>> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new
>> Shipment
>> > > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs processed
>> > > > through this single transfer shipment.
>> > > > What it would mean is that:
>> > > >
>> > > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
>> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From
>> Vendorâ€™
>> > and
>> > > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both originating
>> > and
>> > > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or
>> > business
>> > > >    entity).
>> > > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items
>> > (even
>> > > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
>> > > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO
>> in a
>> > > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
>> > > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then
>> > move
>> > > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s
>> status
>> > can
>> > > > also be
>> > > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the
>> tune
>> > of
>> > > > shipped
>> > > >    units.
>> > > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against
>> > linked
>> > > >    RO.
>> > > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the â€˜Shippedâ€™
>> RO
>> > > > (similar to
>> > > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment
>> that
>> > was
>> > > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On
>> hand to
>> > > > the
>> > > >    tune of received units.
>> > > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the
>> shipment
>> > to
>> > > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be
>> > > > marked as
>> > > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
>> > > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
>> > > > process
>> > > >    wherever needed.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against
>> other
>> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
>> > > > complicated.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > >
>> > > > Swapnil
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
>> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
>> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Hello All,
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks James for the reply.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
>> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for
>> inventory
>> > > > transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO
>> for
>> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using
>> sales/purchase
>> > > > order.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
>> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
>> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
>> > > > order is
>> > > >
>> > > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
>> > > >
>> > > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
>> > > > entity.
>> > > >
>> > > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
>> > > >
>> > > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
>> > > >
>> > > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
>> > > >
>> > > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products
>> > > > at a
>> > > >
>> > > >    time.
>> > > >
>> > > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data
>> model.
>> > > >
>> > > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
>> > > >
>> > > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
>> > > > inventory
>> > > >
>> > > >    transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Please correct me if I missed something.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks & Regards
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Vaibhav Jain
>> > > >
>> > > > Hotwax Systems,
>> > > >
>> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
>> > > >
>> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
>> > > > > inventory
>> > > >
>> > > > > transfer with shipment.
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
>> > > > > discussed
>> > > >
>> > > > > earlier)
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > James Yong
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com
>> >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock
>> > > >
>> > > > > > transfer flow.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e.,
>> > > > > > so
>> > > >
>> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business
>> entity.
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
>> > > >
>> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to
>> current
>> > > > implementation) :
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange
>> but
>> > > >
>> > > > > > there
>> > > >
>> > > > > is
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
>> > > > > > receiver
>> > > >
>> > > > > > as
>> > > >
>> > > > > they
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
>> > > > business
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales
>> or
>> > > >
>> > > > > purchase
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real
>> > > >
>> > > > > > time
>> > > >
>> > > > > payment
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
>> > > > > > applicability
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
>> > > >
>> > > > > > country/state-specific
>> > > >
>> > > > > tax
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    regulations. For example:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
>> > > > > > might be
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
>> > > >
>> > > > > > different rate in
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR
>> tax
>> > > >
>> > > > > > regulations can
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently
>> intra-company
>> > > >
>> > > > > > goods transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       are even taxable or not)
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
>> > > > > > transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > > is
>> > > >
>> > > > > now
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and
>> in
>> > > > > > this
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
>> > > > > > issued
>> > > >
>> > > > > > along
>> > > >
>> > > > > with
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending
>> on
>> > > >
>> > > > > > the inter-state
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
>> having
>> > > > > > single
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
>> with
>> > > >
>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to
>> be
>> > > > issue.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the
>> goods.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is
>> having
>> > > >
>> > > > > different
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches
>> with
>> > > >
>> > > > > > tax authority then *there
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate
>> â€œTax
>> > > >
>> > > > > Invoiceâ€ *
>> > > >
>> > > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > state
>> > > >
>> > > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
>> > > > > > this
>> > > > case.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
>> > > > > > transitioning
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™
>> (from
>> > > > > > originating
>> > > >
>> > > > > facility) Ã
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination facility).
>> > > > > > As it needs to
>> > > > be
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    tracked internally.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
>> > > >
>> > > > > transferred
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
>> > > >
>> > > > > > accounts
>> > > >
>> > > > > per
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
>> > > >
>> > > > > accordance
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    with business rules).
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to
>> systemically
>> > > >
>> > > > > > build
>> > > >
>> > > > > the
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
>> > > > > > individual
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
>> > > > > > for
>> > > >
>> > > > > > a
>> > > >
>> > > > > common
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
>> > > >
>> > > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
>> > > >
>> > > > > > implemented)
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
>> > > > > > that
>> > > >
>> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Swapnil
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > >
>> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
>> > > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
>> > > > > > mentioned
>> > > >
>> > > > > earlier
>> > > >
>> > > > > > to manage group transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is
>> reasonable
>> > > >
>> > > > > > since
>> > > >
>> > > > > we
>> > > >
>> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
>> > > > > > enable
>> > > >
>> > > > > > shipment.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
>> > > > > > selected,
>> > > >
>> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
>> > > > created.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer
>> SO &
>> > PO.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
>> > > > > > only
>> > > >
>> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO
>> to
>> > > >
>> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > James Yong
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <
>> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Requirements
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > like:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > product
>> > > >
>> > > > > in
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
>> > > > > > > Shipment
>> > > >
>> > > > > which is
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    missing.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Accounting
>> > > >
>> > > > > which
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    is missing.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST)
>> on
>> > > >
>> > > > > inventory
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
>> > > >
>> > > > > documentation.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
>> > > > > > > with
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > the
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >    respective transfer order.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to
>> Order
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > "Transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product".
>> Business
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > does
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
>> > > > > > > should
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > be
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the
>> > > > > > > PO
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive
>> product"
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive
>> Product"
>> > > >
>> > > > > workflow.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Yes James,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
>> > > > > > > > with
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
>> > > > > > > > transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
>> > > > > > > > data
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
>> > > >
>> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Swapnil
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > > >]
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>> > > > > > > > records
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or
>> common
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > info
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each
>> InventoryTransfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > will
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > James Yong
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Folks,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is
>> generally
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > for
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
>> > > > > > > > > shipment
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
>> > > > > > > > > only
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > one
>> > > >
>> > > > > > product).
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
>> > > > > > > > > existing
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
>> > > > > > > > > with
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > a
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > single transfer
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it
>> as
>> > > > > > > > > well.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > + Of
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
>> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
>> > > > etc.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases
>> > > > > > > > > and
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Swapnil
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
>> > > >
>> > > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
>> records
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to
>> Inventory
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Item
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Detail
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Inventory
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Transfer table.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > James Yong
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory
>> Item
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Detail
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > table?
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > James Yong
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory
>> item
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > is
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > inventory
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > transfer.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
>> > > > > > > > > > > transferred
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Problem
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
>> > > > > > > > > > > exact
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
>> > > >
>> > > > > maintenance
>> > > >
>> > > > > > of records.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > 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
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> --
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
>> OFBiz based solutions & services
>>
>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>
>
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Pawan Verma <pa...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Hello All,

Thanks, everyone for your thoughts and inputs.

Here <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10353> is the ticket
created for the same. Soon I will add the high-level design of the task.

--
Thanks and Regards,

*Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
<http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore,
M.P, India - 452010
Cell phone: +91 9977705687

On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and protocols
> is a widely accepted solution.
>
> Best regards
>
> Pierre
>
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
> >
> > On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > > Thanks all your suggestions.
> > > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow
> lead
> > to
> > > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to
> use
> > > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the
> discussed
> > > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and
> > most
> > > flexible way.
> > >
> > > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's
> > cut a
> > > JIRA to proceed with it.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Swapnil
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> records
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or
> > without
> > > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
> > > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase
> > > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory
> > > transfer functionalities in the future.
> > >
> > > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
> > > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James Yong
> > >
> > > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that
> > > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
> > > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
> > > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
> > > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new
> Shipment
> > > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs processed
> > > > through this single transfer shipment.
> > > > What it would mean is that:
> > > >
> > > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
> > > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From
> Vendorâ€™
> > and
> > > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both originating
> > and
> > > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or
> > business
> > > >    entity).
> > > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items
> > (even
> > > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
> > > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in
> a
> > > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
> > > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then
> > move
> > > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s status
> > can
> > > > also be
> > > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the
> tune
> > of
> > > > shipped
> > > >    units.
> > > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against
> > linked
> > > >    RO.
> > > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the â€˜Shippedâ€™
> RO
> > > > (similar to
> > > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment
> that
> > was
> > > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand
> to
> > > > the
> > > >    tune of received units.
> > > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment
> > to
> > > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be
> > > > marked as
> > > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
> > > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
> > > > process
> > > >    wherever needed.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other
> > > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
> > > > complicated.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Swapnil
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello All,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks James for the reply.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
> > > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for
> inventory
> > > > transfer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
> > > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using
> sales/purchase
> > > > order.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> > > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
> > > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
> > > > order is
> > > >
> > > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
> > > >
> > > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
> > > > entity.
> > > >
> > > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> > > >
> > > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> > > >
> > > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> > > >
> > > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products
> > > > at a
> > > >
> > > >    time.
> > > >
> > > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data
> model.
> > > >
> > > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
> > > >
> > > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> > > > inventory
> > > >
> > > >    transfer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please correct me if I missed something.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks & Regards
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Vaibhav Jain
> > > >
> > > > Hotwax Systems,
> > > >
> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> > > >
> > > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> > > > > inventory
> > > >
> > > > > transfer with shipment.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> > > > > discussed
> > > >
> > > > > earlier)
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock
> > > >
> > > > > > transfer flow.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e.,
> > > > > > so
> > > >
> > > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business
> entity.
> > > >
> > > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
> > > >
> > > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current
> > > > implementation) :
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange
> but
> > > >
> > > > > > there
> > > >
> > > > > is
> > > >
> > > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> > > > > > receiver
> > > >
> > > > > > as
> > > >
> > > > > they
> > > >
> > > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
> > > > business
> > > >
> > > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or
> > > >
> > > > > purchase
> > > >
> > > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real
> > > >
> > > > > > time
> > > >
> > > > > payment
> > > >
> > > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> > > >
> > > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> > > > > > applicability
> > > >
> > > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> > > >
> > > > > > country/state-specific
> > > >
> > > > > tax
> > > >
> > > > > >    regulations. For example:
> > > >
> > > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
> > > > > > might be
> > > >
> > > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> > > >
> > > > > > different rate in
> > > >
> > > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
> > > >
> > > > > > regulations can
> > > >
> > > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
> > > >
> > > > > > goods transfer
> > > >
> > > > > >       are even taxable or not)
> > > >
> > > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> > > > > > transfer
> > > >
> > > > > > is
> > > >
> > > > > now
> > > >
> > > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> > > >
> > > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and
> in
> > > > > > this
> > > >
> > > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
> > > > > > issued
> > > >
> > > > > > along
> > > >
> > > > > with
> > > >
> > > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending
> on
> > > >
> > > > > > the inter-state
> > > >
> > > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> > > >
> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> > > > > > single
> > > >
> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> > > >
> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> > > >
> > > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to
> be
> > > > issue.
> > > >
> > > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
> > > >
> > > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> > > >
> > > > > different
> > > >
> > > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> > > >
> > > > > > tax authority then *there
> > > >
> > > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate
> â€œTax
> > > >
> > > > > Invoiceâ€ *
> > > >
> > > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> > > >
> > > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
> > > > > > the
> > > > state
> > > >
> > > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
> > > > > > this
> > > > case.
> > > >
> > > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> > > > > > transitioning
> > > >
> > > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™ (from
> > > > > > originating
> > > >
> > > > > facility) Ã
> > > >
> > > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination facility).
> > > > > > As it needs to
> > > > be
> > > >
> > > > > >    tracked internally.
> > > >
> > > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
> > > >
> > > > > transferred
> > > >
> > > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
> > > >
> > > > > > accounts
> > > >
> > > > > per
> > > >
> > > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
> > > >
> > > > > accordance
> > > >
> > > > > >    with business rules).
> > > >
> > > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically
> > > >
> > > > > > build
> > > >
> > > > > the
> > > >
> > > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> > > > > > individual
> > > >
> > > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
> > > > > > for
> > > >
> > > > > > a
> > > >
> > > > > common
> > > >
> > > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> > > >
> > > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> > > >
> > > > > > implemented)
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
> > > > > > that
> > > >
> > > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Swapnil
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >
> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
> > > >
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> > > >
> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> > > > > > mentioned
> > > >
> > > > > earlier
> > > >
> > > > > > to manage group transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is
> reasonable
> > > >
> > > > > > since
> > > >
> > > > > we
> > > >
> > > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
> > > > > > enable
> > > >
> > > > > > shipment.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> > > > > > selected,
> > > >
> > > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
> > > > created.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO
> &
> > PO.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
> > > > > > only
> > > >
> > > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to
> > > >
> > > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.
> com>
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Requirements
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > like:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
> > > >
> > > > > > > product
> > > >
> > > > > in
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > > > > > > Shipment
> > > >
> > > > > which is
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    missing.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > > >
> > > > > > > Accounting
> > > >
> > > > > which
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    is missing.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST)
> on
> > > >
> > > > > inventory
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> > > >
> > > > > documentation.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
> > > > > > > with
> > > >
> > > > > > > the
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >    respective transfer order.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
> > > >
> > > > > > > "Transfer
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product".
> Business
> > > >
> > > > > > > does
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
> > > > > > > should
> > > >
> > > > > > > be
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the
> > > > > > > PO
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product"
> > > > > > > is
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
> > > >
> > > > > > > transfer
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"
> > > >
> > > > > workflow.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes James,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
> > > > > > > > with
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> > > > > > > > transfer
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
> > > > > > > > data
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> > > >
> > > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Swapnil
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > >]
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > > > > > > > records
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or
> common
> > > >
> > > > > > > > info
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer
> > > >
> > > > > > > > will
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> > > >
> > > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > transfer
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> > > > > > > > > shipment
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
> > > > > > > > > only
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > one
> > > >
> > > > > > product).
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> > > > > > > > > existing
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
> > > > > > > > > with
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > single transfer
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as
> > > > > > > > > well.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > + Of
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> > > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> > > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Swapnil
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> > > >
> > > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> records
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Item
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Detail
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Inventory
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Transfer table.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Detail
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > table?
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory
> item
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > inventory
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > transfer.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> > > > > > > > > > > transferred
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > quantity
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Problem
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
> > > > > > > > > > > exact
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
> > > >
> > > > > maintenance
> > > >
> > > > > > of records.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --
> Pierre Smits
>
> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.

An internal order policy with appropriate process definition and protocols
is a widely accepted solution.

Best regards

Pierre

On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 at 14:59 James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> +1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.
>
> On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > Thanks all your suggestions.
> > I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow lead
> to
> > the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to use
> > one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the discussed
> > requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and
> most
> > flexible way.
> >
> > If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's
> cut a
> > JIRA to proceed with it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Swapnil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or
> without
> > Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
> > transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase
> > Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory
> > transfer functionalities in the future.
> >
> > We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
> > http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that
> > > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
> > > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
> > > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
> > > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment
> > > Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs processed
> > > through this single transfer shipment.
> > > What it would mean is that:
> > >
> > >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
> > >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
> > >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From Vendorâ€™
> and
> > >    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both originating
> and
> > >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or
> business
> > >    entity).
> > >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items
> (even
> > >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
> > >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a
> > >    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
> > >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then
> move
> > >    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s status
> can
> > > also be
> > >    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the tune
> of
> > > shipped
> > >    units.
> > >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against
> linked
> > >    RO.
> > >    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the â€˜Shippedâ€™ RO
> > > (similar to
> > >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that
> was
> > >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to
> > > the
> > >    tune of received units.
> > >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment
> to
> > >    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be
> > > marked as
> > >    â€˜Completedâ€™.
> > >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
> > > process
> > >    wherever needed.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other
> > > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
> > > complicated.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Swapnil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks James for the reply.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
> > > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory
> > > transfer.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
> > > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase
> > > order.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> > > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
> > > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
> > > order is
> > >
> > >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
> > >
> > >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
> > > entity.
> > >
> > >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> > >
> > >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> > >
> > >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> > >
> > >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products
> > > at a
> > >
> > >    time.
> > >
> > >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model.
> > >
> > >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
> > >
> > >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> > > inventory
> > >
> > >    transfer.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please correct me if I missed something.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Vaibhav Jain
> > >
> > > Hotwax Systems,
> > >
> > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Swapnil,
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> > >
> > > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> > > > inventory
> > >
> > > > transfer with shipment.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> > > > discussed
> > >
> > > > earlier)
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > >
> > > > James Yong
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock
> > >
> > > > > transfer flow.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e.,
> > > > > so
> > >
> > > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity.
> > >
> > > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
> > >
> > > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current
> > > implementation) :
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but
> > >
> > > > > there
> > >
> > > > is
> > >
> > > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> > > > > receiver
> > >
> > > > > as
> > >
> > > > they
> > >
> > > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
> > > business
> > >
> > > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or
> > >
> > > > purchase
> > >
> > > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real
> > >
> > > > > time
> > >
> > > > payment
> > >
> > > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> > >
> > > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> > > > > applicability
> > >
> > > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> > >
> > > > > country/state-specific
> > >
> > > > tax
> > >
> > > > >    regulations. For example:
> > >
> > > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
> > > > > might be
> > >
> > > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> > >
> > > > > different rate in
> > >
> > > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
> > >
> > > > > regulations can
> > >
> > > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
> > >
> > > > > goods transfer
> > >
> > > > >       are even taxable or not)
> > >
> > > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> > > > > transfer
> > >
> > > > > is
> > >
> > > > now
> > >
> > > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> > >
> > > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in
> > > > > this
> > >
> > > > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
> > > > > issued
> > >
> > > > > along
> > >
> > > > with
> > >
> > > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on
> > >
> > > > > the inter-state
> > >
> > > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> > >
> > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> > > > > single
> > >
> > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> > >
> > > > > tax authority then *there
> > >
> > > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be
> > > issue.
> > >
> > > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
> > >
> > > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> > >
> > > > different
> > >
> > > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> > >
> > > > > tax authority then *there
> > >
> > > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate â€œTax
> > >
> > > > Invoiceâ€ *
> > >
> > > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> > >
> > > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
> > > > > the
> > > state
> > >
> > > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
> > > > > this
> > > case.
> > >
> > > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> > > > > transitioning
> > >
> > > > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™ (from
> > > > > originating
> > >
> > > > facility) Ã
> > >
> > > > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination facility).
> > > > > As it needs to
> > > be
> > >
> > > > >    tracked internally.
> > >
> > > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
> > >
> > > > transferred
> > >
> > > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
> > >
> > > > > accounts
> > >
> > > > per
> > >
> > > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
> > >
> > > > accordance
> > >
> > > > >    with business rules).
> > >
> > > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically
> > >
> > > > > build
> > >
> > > > the
> > >
> > > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> > > > > individual
> > >
> > > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
> > > > > for
> > >
> > > > > a
> > >
> > > > common
> > >
> > > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> > >
> > > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> > >
> > > > > implemented)
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
> > > > > that
> > >
> > > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Swapnil
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
> > >
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> > >
> > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >
> > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Hi Vaibhav,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> > > > > mentioned
> > >
> > > > earlier
> > >
> > > > > to manage group transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable
> > >
> > > > > since
> > >
> > > > we
> > >
> > > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
> > > > > enable
> > >
> > > > > shipment.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> > > > > selected,
> > >
> > > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
> > > created.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO &
> PO.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
> > > > > only
> > >
> > > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to
> > >
> > > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > James Yong
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Requirements
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > like:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
> > >
> > > > > > product
> > >
> > > > in
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    any inventory transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > > > > > Shipment
> > >
> > > > which is
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    missing.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > >
> > > > > > Accounting
> > >
> > > > which
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    is missing.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on
> > >
> > > > inventory
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> > >
> > > > documentation.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
> > > > > > with
> > >
> > > > > > the
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >    respective transfer order.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
> > >
> > > > > > "Transfer
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business
> > >
> > > > > > does
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
> > > > > > should
> > >
> > > > > > be
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the
> > > > > > PO
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product"
> > > > > > is
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
> > >
> > > > > > transfer
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"
> > >
> > > > workflow.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Please share your thoughts
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Thanks & Regards
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Vaibhav Jain
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Hotwax Systems,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Yes James,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
> > > > > > > with
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> > > > > > > transfer
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
> > > > > > > data
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> > >
> > > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Swapnil
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> > >
> > > > >]
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > > > > > > records
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common
> > >
> > > > > > > info
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > related to the group transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer
> > >
> > > > > > > will
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > James Yong
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> > >
> > > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Folks,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
> > >
> > > > > > > > transfer
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally
> > >
> > > > > > > > for
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> > > > > > > > shipment
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
> > > > > > > > only
> > >
> > > > > > > > one
> > >
> > > > > product).
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> > > > > > > > existing
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
> > > > > > > > with
> > >
> > > > > > > > a
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > single transfer
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as
> > > > > > > > well.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > + Of
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> > > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> > > etc.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases
> > > > > > > > and
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Swapnil
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> > >
> > > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory
> > >
> > > > > > > > Item
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Detail
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
> > >
> > > > > > > > Inventory
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Transfer table.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > James Yong
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item
> > >
> > > > > > > > > Detail
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > table?
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > James Yong
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > is
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > inventory
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > transfer.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> > > > > > > > > > transferred
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > quantity
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > Problem
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
> > > > > > > > > > exact
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > quantity for which
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
> > >
> > > > maintenance
> > >
> > > > > of records.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > 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
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
-- 
Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

+1 for Inventory Transfer without using Order entity.

On 2017-10-28 02:13, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Thanks all your suggestions.
> I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow lead to
> the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to use
> one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the discussed
> requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and most
> flexible way.
> 
> If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's cut a
> JIRA to proceed with it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Swapnil
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or without
> Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
> transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase
> Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory
> transfer functionalities in the future.
> 
> We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
> http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment
> 
> Regards,
> James Yong
> 
> On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that
> > needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
> > part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
> > model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
> > 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment
> > Type Ã¢â¬ËTransfer ShipmentÃ¢â¬â¢. And allow to have these ROs processed
> > through this single transfer shipment.
> > What it would mean is that:
> >
> >    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
> >    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
> >    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same Ã¢â¬ËBill/Ship From VendorÃ¢â¬â¢ and
> >    Ã¢â¬ËBill/Ship to CustomerÃ¢â¬â¢ party id (as long as both originating and
> >    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or business
> >    entity).
> >    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items (even
> >    if it means overriding existing reservations).
> >    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a
> >    single Ã¢â¬ËTransfer ShipmentÃ¢â¬â¢ during picking.
> >    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then move
> >    its status to Ã¢â¬ËShippedÃ¢â¬â¢. At the same time linked ROÃ¢â¬â¢s status can
> > also be
> >    marked as Ã¢â¬ËShippedÃ¢â¬â¢. This should affect the on Hand to the tune of
> > shipped
> >    units.
> >    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against linked
> >    RO.
> >    6. Allow Destination Facility to Ã¢â¬ËReceiveÃ¢â¬â¢ the Ã¢â¬ËShippedÃ¢â¬â¢ RO
> > (similar to
> >    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that was
> >    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to
> > the
> >    tune of received units.
> >    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment to
> >    Ã¢â¬ËReceivedÃ¢â¬â¢ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be
> > marked as
> >    Ã¢â¬ËCompletedÃ¢â¬â¢.
> >    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
> > process
> >    wherever needed.
> >
> >
> >
> > I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other
> > suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
> > complicated.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Swapnil
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks James for the reply.
> >
> >
> >
> > I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
> > model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory
> > transfer.
> >
> >
> >
> > We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
> > another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase
> > order.
> >
> >
> >
> > Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> > inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> >
> >
> >
> > We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
> > using separate data model for inventory transfer.
> >
> >
> >
> >    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
> > order is
> >
> >    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
> >
> >    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
> > entity.
> >
> >    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> >
> >    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> >
> >    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> >
> >    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products
> > at a
> >
> >    time.
> >
> >    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model.
> >
> >    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
> >
> >    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> > inventory
> >
> >    transfer.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please correct me if I missed something.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Regards
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> > Vaibhav Jain
> >
> > Hotwax Systems,
> >
> > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi Swapnil,
> >
> > >
> >
> > > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> >
> > > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> > > inventory
> >
> > > transfer with shipment.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> > > discussed
> >
> > > earlier)
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Regards,
> >
> > > James Yong
> >
> > >
> >
> > > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock
> >
> > > > transfer flow.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e.,
> > > > so
> >
> > > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity.
> >
> > > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
> >
> > > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current
> > implementation) :
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but
> >
> > > > there
> >
> > > is
> >
> > > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> > > > receiver
> >
> > > > as
> >
> > > they
> >
> > > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
> > business
> >
> > > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or
> >
> > > purchase
> >
> > > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real
> >
> > > > time
> >
> > > payment
> >
> > > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> >
> > > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> > > > applicability
> >
> > > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> >
> > > > country/state-specific
> >
> > > tax
> >
> > > >    regulations. For example:
> >
> > > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
> > > > might be
> >
> > > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> >
> > > > different rate in
> >
> > > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
> >
> > > > regulations can
> >
> > > >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
> >
> > > > goods transfer
> >
> > > >       are even taxable or not)
> >
> > > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> > > > transfer
> >
> > > > is
> >
> > > now
> >
> > > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> >
> > > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in
> > > > this
> >
> > > >          case, only a separate Ã¢â¬ÅTax InvoiceÃ¢â¬ * needs to be
> > > > issued
> >
> > > > along
> >
> > > with
> >
> > > >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on
> >
> > > > the inter-state
> >
> > > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> >
> > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> > > > single
> >
> > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> >
> > > > tax authority then *there
> >
> > > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be
> > issue.
> >
> > > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
> >
> > > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> >
> > > different
> >
> > > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> >
> > > > tax authority then *there
> >
> > > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate Ã¢â¬ÅTax
> >
> > > InvoiceÃ¢â¬ *
> >
> > > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> >
> > > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
> > > > the
> > state
> >
> > > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
> > > > this
> > case.
> >
> > > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> > > > transitioning
> >
> > > >    i.e. Ã¢â¬ËRequestedÃ¢â¬â¢ Ã  Ã¢â¬ËIn-reviewÃ¢â¬â¢ Ã  Ã¢â¬ËShippedÃ¢â¬â¢ (from
> > > > originating
> >
> > > facility) Ã
> >
> > > >    Ã¢â¬ËIn-transitÃ¢â¬â¢ Ã  Ã¢â¬ËReceivedÃ¢â¬â¢ (at destination facility).
> > > > As it needs to
> > be
> >
> > > >    tracked internally.
> >
> > > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
> >
> > > transferred
> >
> > > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
> >
> > > > accounts
> >
> > > per
> >
> > > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
> >
> > > accordance
> >
> > > >    with business rules).
> >
> > > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically
> >
> > > > build
> >
> > > the
> >
> > > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> > > > individual
> >
> > > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
> > > > for
> >
> > > > a
> >
> > > common
> >
> > > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> >
> > > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> >
> > > > implemented)
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
> > > > that
> >
> > > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Thanks,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Swapnil
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > > > <ja...@apache.org>]
> >
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> >
> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >
> > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Hi Vaibhav,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> > > > mentioned
> >
> > > earlier
> >
> > > > to manage group transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable
> >
> > > > since
> >
> > > we
> >
> > > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
> > > > enable
> >
> > > > shipment.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> > > > selected,
> >
> > > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
> > created.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
> > > > only
> >
> > > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to
> >
> > > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Regards,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > James Yong
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Requirements
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > like:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
> >
> > > > > product
> >
> > > in
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    any inventory transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > > > > Shipment
> >
> > > which is
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    missing.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> >
> > > > > Accounting
> >
> > > which
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    is missing.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on
> >
> > > inventory
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> >
> > > documentation.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
> > > > > with
> >
> > > > > the
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >    respective transfer order.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
> >
> > > > > "Transfer
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business
> >
> > > > > does
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
> > > > > should
> >
> > > > > be
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the
> > > > > PO
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product"
> > > > > is
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
> >
> > > > > transfer
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"
> >
> > > workflow.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Please share your thoughts
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Thanks & Regards
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Vaibhav Jain
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > Hotwax Systems,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Yes James,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
> > > > > > with
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> > > > > > transfer
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
> > > > > > data
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> >
> > > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Swapnil
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> >
> > > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> >
> > > >]
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > > > > > records
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common
> >
> > > > > > info
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > related to the group transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer
> >
> > > > > > will
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > Regards,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > James Yong
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> >
> > > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >
> > > > wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Folks,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
> >
> > > > > > > transfer
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally
> >
> > > > > > > for
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> > > > > > > shipment
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
> > > > > > > only
> >
> > > > > > > one
> >
> > > > product).
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> > > > > > > existing
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
> > > > > > > with
> >
> > > > > > > a
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > single transfer
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as
> > > > > > > well.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > + Of
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> > > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> > etc.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases
> > > > > > > and
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Swapnil
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> >
> > > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory
> >
> > > > > > > Item
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Detail
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
> >
> > > > > > > Inventory
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Transfer table.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > What do you think?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > James Yong
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item
> >
> > > > > > > > Detail
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > table?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > James Yong
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > Hello,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item
> >
> > > > > > > > > is
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > inventory
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > transfer.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> > > > > > > > > transferred
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
> >
> > > > > > > > > quantity
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.
> >
> > > > > > > > > Problem
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
> > > > > > > > > exact
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > quantity for which
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
> >
> > > maintenance
> >
> > > > of records.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > --
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > > 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
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
>

RE: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Thanks all your suggestions.
I think similarity of the discussed requirements with ordering flow lead to
the suggestions to use Order model. I don't have strong preference to use
one over another as long as we are able to support bulk of the discussed
requirements in this thread in a less complicated, easy to maintain and most
flexible way.

If we all are in agreement to take Inventory Transfer route then let's cut a
JIRA to proceed with it.

Thanks,
Swapnil

-----Original Message-----
From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 8:27 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Hi all,

Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or without
Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory
transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase
Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory
transfer functionalities in the future.

We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that
> needs to change hands between source and destination facility as a
> part of single operational system. If we are willing to take Order
> model route, then is it possible that we introduce a new order type
> 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or 'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment
> Type â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™. And allow to have these ROs processed
> through this single transfer shipment.
> What it would mean is that:
>
>    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
>    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
>    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same â€˜Bill/Ship From Vendorâ€™ and
>    â€˜Bill/Ship to Customerâ€™ party id (as long as both originating and
>    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or business
>    entity).
>    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items (even
>    if it means overriding existing reservations).
>    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a
>    single â€˜Transfer Shipmentâ€™ during picking.
>    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then move
>    its status to â€˜Shippedâ€™. At the same time linked ROâ€™s status can
> also be
>    marked as â€˜Shippedâ€™. This should affect the on Hand to the tune of
> shipped
>    units.
>    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against linked
>    RO.
>    6. Allow Destination Facility to â€˜Receiveâ€™ the â€˜Shippedâ€™ RO
> (similar to
>    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that was
>    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to
> the
>    tune of received units.
>    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment to
>    â€˜Receivedâ€™ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be
> marked as
>    â€˜Completedâ€™.
>    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the
> process
>    wherever needed.
>
>
>
> I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other
> suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
> complicated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Swapnil
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
>
>
>
> Thanks James for the reply.
>
>
>
> I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data
> model for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory
> transfer.
>
>
>
> We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
> another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase
> order.
>
>
>
> Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while
> inventory transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
>
>
>
> We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of
> using separate data model for inventory transfer.
>
>
>
>    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that
> order is
>
>    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
>
>    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus
> entity.
>
>    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
>
>    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
>
>    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
>
>    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products
> at a
>
>    time.
>
>    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model.
>
>    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
>
>    document(legal document vary according to country law) with
> inventory
>
>    transfer.
>
>
>
> Please correct me if I missed something.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> --
>
>
>
> Vaibhav Jain
>
> Hotwax Systems,
>
> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Swapnil,
>
> >
>
> > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
>
> >
>
> > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
>
> > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support
> > inventory
>
> > transfer with shipment.
>
> >
>
> > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
>
> >
>
> > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as
> > discussed
>
> > earlier)
>
> >
>
> > Regards,
>
> > James Yong
>
> >
>
> > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock
>
> > > transfer flow.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e.,
> > > so
>
> > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity.
>
> > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
>
> > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current
> implementation) :
>
> > >
>
> > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but
>
> > > there
>
> > is
>
> > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and
> > > receiver
>
> > > as
>
> > they
>
> > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
> business
>
> > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or
>
> > purchase
>
> > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real
>
> > > time
>
> > payment
>
> > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
>
> > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its
> > > applicability
>
> > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
>
> > > country/state-specific
>
> > tax
>
> > >    regulations. For example:
>
> > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state
> > > might be
>
> > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
>
> > > different rate in
>
> > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
>
> > > regulations can
>
> > >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
>
> > > goods transfer
>
> > >       are even taxable or not)
>
> > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods
> > > transfer
>
> > > is
>
> > now
>
> > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
>
> > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in
> > > this
>
> > >          case, only a separate â€œTax Invoiceâ€ * needs to be
> > > issued
>
> > > along
>
> > with
>
> > >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on
>
> > > the inter-state
>
> > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
>
> > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> > > single
>
> > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
>
> > > tax authority then *there
>
> > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be
> issue.
>
> > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
>
> > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
>
> > different
>
> > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
>
> > > tax authority then *there
>
> > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate â€œTax
>
> > Invoiceâ€ *
>
> > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
>
> > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to
> > > the
> state
>
> > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in
> > > this
> case.
>
> > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status
> > > transitioning
>
> > >    i.e. â€˜Requestedâ€™ Ã  â€˜In-reviewâ€™ Ã  â€˜Shippedâ€™ (from
> > > originating
>
> > facility) Ã
>
> > >    â€˜In-transitâ€™ Ã  â€˜Receivedâ€™ (at destination facility).
> > > As it needs to
> be
>
> > >    tracked internally.
>
> > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
>
> > transferred
>
> > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
>
> > > accounts
>
> > per
>
> > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
>
> > accordance
>
> > >    with business rules).
>
> > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically
>
> > > build
>
> > the
>
> > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the
> > > individual
>
> > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement
> > > for
>
> > > a
>
> > common
>
> > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
>
> > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
>
> > > implemented)
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution
> > > that
>
> > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > >
>
> > > Swapnil
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
>
> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> > > <ja...@apache.org>]
>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
>
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>
> > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Hi Vaibhav,
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as
> > > mentioned
>
> > earlier
>
> > > to manage group transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable
>
> > > since
>
> > we
>
> > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to
> > > enable
>
> > > shipment.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is
> > > selected,
>
> > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
> created.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can
> > > only
>
> > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to
>
> > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > >
>
> > > James Yong
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>
> > wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
>
> > >
>
> > > > Requirements
>
> > >
>
> > > > like:
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
>
> > > > product
>
> > in
>
> > >
>
> > > >    any inventory transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> > > > Shipment
>
> > which is
>
> > >
>
> > > >    missing.
>
> > >
>
> > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
>
> > > > Accounting
>
> > which
>
> > >
>
> > > >    is missing.
>
> > >
>
> > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on
>
> > inventory
>
> > >
>
> > > >    transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
>
> > documentation.
>
> > >
>
> > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
>
> > >
>
> > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver)
> > > > with
>
> > > > the
>
> > >
>
> > > >    respective transfer order.
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
>
> > >
>
> > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
>
> > > > "Transfer
>
> > >
>
> > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business
>
> > > > does
>
> > >
>
> > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO
> > > > should
>
> > > > be
>
> > >
>
> > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the
> > > > PO
>
> > >
>
> > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product"
> > > > is
>
> > >
>
> > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
>
> > > > transfer
>
> > >
>
> > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"
>
> > workflow.
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > Please share your thoughts
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > Thanks & Regards
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > Vaibhav Jain
>
> > >
>
> > > > Hotwax Systems,
>
> > >
>
> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
>
> > >
>
> > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Yes James,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled
> > > > > with
>
> > >
>
> > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item
> > > > > transfer
>
> > >
>
> > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain
> > > > > data
>
> > >
>
> > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
>
> > > InventoryTransferShipment.
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Thanks & Regards,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Swapnil
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
>
> > >
>
> > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
>
> > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
>
> > >]
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
>
> > >
>
> > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer
> > > > > records
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common
>
> > > > > info
>
> > >
>
> > > > > related to the group transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer
>
> > > > > will
>
> > >
>
> > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > Regards,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > James Yong
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
>
> > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>
> > > wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Folks,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
>
> > > > > > transfer
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally
>
> > > > > > for
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single
> > > > > > shipment
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence
> > > > > > only
>
> > > > > > one
>
> > > product).
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the
> > > > > > existing
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied
> > > > > > with
>
> > > > > > a
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > single transfer
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > InventoryTransferId
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as
> > > > > > well.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > + Of
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via
> > > > > > InventoryItemDetail
> etc.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases
> > > > > > and
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Swapnil
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
>
> > jamesyong@apache.org>]
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Hi all,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory
>
> > > > > > Item
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Detail
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
>
> > > > > > Inventory
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Transfer table.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > What do you think?
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > Regards,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > James Yong
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item
>
> > > > > > > Detail
>
> > >
>
> > > > > table?
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > Regards,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > James Yong
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > Hello,
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item
>
> > > > > > > > is
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > inventory
>
> > >
>
> > > > > transfer.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store
> > > > > > > > transferred
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
>
> > > > > > > > quantity
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.
>
> > > > > > > > Problem
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get
> > > > > > > > exact
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > quantity for which
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
>
> > maintenance
>
> > > of records.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > --
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > > 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
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi all,

Having suggested possible entity changes to both approaches (with or without Order entity), I prefer not to make use of Order entity for inventory transfer. Order entity is currently shared by Sales Order and Purchase Order. Using Order for transfer may make it harder to expand inventory transfer functionalities in the future.

We can also look at OpenTap's implementation for reference.
http://www.opentaps.org/docs/index.php/Transfer_Shipment

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-25 11:43, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that needs
> to change hands between source and destination facility as a part of single
> operational system. If we are willing to take Order model route, then is it
> possible that we introduce a new order type 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or
> 'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment Type âTransfer Shipmentâ. And
> allow to have these ROs processed through this single transfer shipment.
> What it would mean is that:
> 
>    1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
>    DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
>    DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same âBill/Ship From Vendorâ and
>    âBill/Ship to Customerâ party id (as long as both originating and
>    destination facilities are owned by same registered company or business
>    entity).
>    2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items (even
>    if it means overriding existing reservations).
>    3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a
>    single âTransfer Shipmentâ during picking.
>    4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then move
>    its status to âShippedâ. At the same time linked ROâs status can also be
>    marked as âShippedâ. This should affect the on Hand to the tune of shipped
>    units.
>    5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against linked
>    RO.
>    6. Allow Destination Facility to âReceiveâ the âShippedâ RO (similar to
>    PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that was
>    shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to the
>    tune of received units.
>    7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment to
>    âReceivedâ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be marked as
>    âCompletedâ.
>    8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the process
>    wherever needed.
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other
> suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
> complicated.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Swapnil
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> 
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks James for the reply.
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data model
> for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory transfer.
> 
> 
> 
> We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
> another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase
> order.
> 
> 
> 
> Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while inventory
> transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.
> 
> 
> 
> We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of using
> separate data model for inventory transfer.
> 
> 
> 
>    1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that order is
> 
>    transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
> 
>    2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus entity.
> 
>    3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
> 
>    4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
> 
>    5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
> 
>    6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products at a
> 
>    time.
> 
>    7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model.
> 
>    8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
> 
>    document(legal document vary according to country law) with inventory
> 
>    transfer.
> 
> 
> 
> Please correct me if I missed something.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks & Regards
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 
> Vaibhav Jain
> 
> Hotwax Systems,
> 
> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Hi Swapnil,
> 
> >
> 
> > You may want to consider having the following modifications:
> 
> >
> 
> > 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> 
> > InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory
> 
> > transfer with shipment.
> 
> >
> 
> > 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
> 
> >
> 
> > 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as discussed
> 
> > earlier)
> 
> >
> 
> > Regards,
> 
> > James Yong
> 
> >
> 
> > On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock
> 
> > > transfer flow.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., so
> 
> > > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity.
> 
> > > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of
> 
> > > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current
> implementation) :
> 
> > >
> 
> > >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but
> 
> > > there
> 
> > is
> 
> > >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and receiver
> 
> > > as
> 
> > they
> 
> > >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
> business
> 
> > >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or
> 
> > purchase
> 
> > >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real
> 
> > > time
> 
> > payment
> 
> > >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> 
> > >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its applicability
> 
> > >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or
> 
> > > country/state-specific
> 
> > tax
> 
> > >    regulations. For example:
> 
> > >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state might be
> 
> > >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> 
> > > different rate in
> 
> > >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
> 
> > > regulations can
> 
> > >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
> 
> > > goods transfer
> 
> > >       are even taxable or not)
> 
> > >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods transfer
> 
> > > is
> 
> > now
> 
> > >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> 
> > >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in this
> 
> > >          case, only a separate âTax Invoiceâ* needs to be issued
> 
> > > along
> 
> > with
> 
> > >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on
> 
> > > the inter-state
> 
> > >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> 
> > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having single
> 
> > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> 
> > > tax authority then *there
> 
> > >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be
> issue.
> 
> > >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
> 
> > >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> 
> > different
> 
> > >          registration for originating and receiving branches with
> 
> > > tax authority then *there
> 
> > >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate âTax
> 
> > Invoiceâ*
> 
> > >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> 
> > >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to the
> state
> 
> > >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in this
> case.
> 
> > >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status transitioning
> 
> > >    i.e. âRequestedâ Ã  âIn-reviewâ Ã  âShippedâ (from originating
> 
> > facility) Ã 
> 
> > >    âIn-transitâ Ã  âReceivedâ (at destination facility). As it needs to
> be
> 
> > >    tracked internally.
> 
> > >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
> 
> > transferred
> 
> > >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL
> 
> > > accounts
> 
> > per
> 
> > >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
> 
> > accordance
> 
> > >    with business rules).
> 
> > >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically
> 
> > > build
> 
> > the
> 
> > >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the individual
> 
> > >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement for
> 
> > > a
> 
> > common
> 
> > >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> 
> > >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets
> 
> > > implemented)
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution that
> 
> > > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Thanks,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Swapnil
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> 
> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <ja...@apache.org>]
> 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> 
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> 
> > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Hi Vaibhav,
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as mentioned
> 
> > earlier
> 
> > > to manage group transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable
> 
> > > since
> 
> > we
> 
> > > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to enable
> 
> > > shipment.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is selected,
> 
> > > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
> created.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can only
> 
> > > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to
> 
> > > specify the inventory item id for reservation.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Regards,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > James Yong
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> 
> > wrote:
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Requirements
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > like:
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one
> 
> > > > product
> 
> > in
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    any inventory transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment
> 
> > which is
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    missing.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with
> 
> > > > Accounting
> 
> > which
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    is missing.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on
> 
> > inventory
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> 
> > documentation.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with
> 
> > > > the
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >    respective transfer order.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a
> 
> > > > "Transfer
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business
> 
> > > > does
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should
> 
> > > > be
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" is
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of
> 
> > > > transfer
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"
> 
> > workflow.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Please share your thoughts
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Thanks & Regards
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Vaibhav Jain
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > Hotwax Systems,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Yes James,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> 
> > > InventoryTransferShipment.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Swapnil
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org
> 
> > > > > <jamesyong@apache.org
> 
> > >]
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Hi Swapnil,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common
> 
> > > > > info
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > related to the group transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer
> 
> > > > > will
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > Regards,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > James Yong
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah
> 
> > > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> 
> > > wrote:
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Folks,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any
> 
> > > > > > transfer
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally
> 
> > > > > > for
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence only
> 
> > > > > > one
> 
> > > product).
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with
> 
> > > > > > a
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > single transfer
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > InventoryTransferId
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > + Of
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail
> etc.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Swapnil
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> 
> > jamesyong@apache.org>]
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Hi all,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory
> 
> > > > > > Item
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Detail
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the
> 
> > > > > > Inventory
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Transfer table.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > What do you think?
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > Regards,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > James Yong
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item
> 
> > > > > > > Detail
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > table?
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > Regards,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > James Yong
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > wrote:
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > Hello,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item
> 
> > > > > > > > is
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > inventory
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > transfer.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and
> 
> > > > > > > > quantity
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.
> 
> > > > > > > > Problem
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > quantity for which
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
> 
> > maintenance
> 
> > > of records.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > --
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > > 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
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> >
>

RE: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Let's keep in mind that in reality it's the same single shipment that needs
to change hands between source and destination facility as a part of single
operational system. If we are willing to take Order model route, then is it
possible that we introduce a new order type 'Replenishment Order (RO)' or
'Transfer Order' along with new Shipment Type ‘Transfer Shipment’. And
allow to have these ROs processed through this single transfer shipment.
What it would mean is that:

   1. Create RO with Shipping Facility (i.e. originating
   DC/Warehouse/Store) and Receiving Facility (i.e. destination
   DC/Warehouse/Store). Possibly with same ‘Bill/Ship From Vendor’ and
   ‘Bill/Ship to Customer’ party id (as long as both originating and
   destination facilities are owned by same registered company or business
   entity).
   2. Allow to selectively reserve Inventory Items against RO items (even
   if it means overriding existing reservations).
   3. Allow warehouse/facility to group all common destination RO in a
   single ‘Transfer Shipment’ during picking.
   4. Once shipment is packed/shipped from originating facility then move
   its status to ‘Shipped’. At the same time linked RO’s status can also be
   marked as ‘Shipped’. This should affect the on Hand to the tune of shipped
   units.
   5. Generate only a separate Tax Invoice (if applicable) against linked
   RO.
   6. Allow Destination Facility to ‘Receive’ the ‘Shipped’ RO (similar to
   PO receiving) but under the very same linked Transfer Shipment that was
   shipped from originating facility. This should affect the On hand to the
   tune of received units.
   7. Once whole Shipment is successfully received, move the shipment to
   ‘Received’ status. And at the same time linked RO can also be marked as
   ‘Completed’.
   8. Hit the necessary and relevant GL accounts and posting in the process
   wherever needed.



I am not sure about level of technical changes involved against other
suggested approaches, so please feel free to ignore if it looks over
complicated.



Thanks,

Swapnil



-----Original Message-----
From: Vaibhav Jain [mailto:vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:46 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records



Hello All,



Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.



Thanks James for the reply.



I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data model
for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory transfer.



We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase
order.



Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while inventory
transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.



We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of using
separate data model for inventory transfer.



   1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that order is

   transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).

   2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus entity.

   3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.

   4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.

   5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.

   6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products at a

   time.

   7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model.

   8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer

   document(legal document vary according to country law) with inventory

   transfer.



Please correct me if I missed something.



Thanks & Regards

--



Vaibhav Jain

Hotwax Systems,

vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com



On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:



> Hi Swapnil,

>

> You may want to consider having the following modifications:

>

> 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.

> InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory

> transfer with shipment.

>

> 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.

>

> 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as discussed

> earlier)

>

> Regards,

> James Yong

>

> On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock

> > transfer flow.

> >

> >

> >

> > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., so

> > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity.

> > Here are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of

> > technical trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current
implementation) :

> >

> >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but

> > there

> is

> >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and receiver

> > as

> they

> >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So
business

> >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or

> purchase

> >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real

> > time

> payment

> >    or invoice settlement required at either end.

> >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its applicability

> >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or

> > country/state-specific

> tax

> >    regulations. For example:

> >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state might be

> >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at

> > different rate in

> >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax

> > regulations can

> >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company

> > goods transfer

> >       are even taxable or not)

> >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods transfer

> > is

> now

> >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:

> >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in this

> >          case, only a separate “Tax Invoice”* needs to be issued

> > along

> with

> >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on

> > the inter-state

> >          regulations while crossing the state borders)

> >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having single

> >          registration for originating and receiving branches with

> > tax authority then *there

> >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be
issue.

> >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.

> >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having

> different

> >          registration for originating and receiving branches with

> > tax authority then *there

> >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate “Tax

> Invoice”*

> >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.

> >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to the
state

> >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in this
case.

> >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status transitioning

> >    i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ (from originating

> facility) à

> >    ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination facility). As it needs to
be

> >    tracked internally.

> >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the

> transferred

> >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL

> > accounts

> per

> >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in

> accordance

> >    with business rules).

> >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically

> > build

> the

> >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the individual

> >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement for

> > a

> common

> >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like

> >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets

> > implemented)

> >

> >

> >

> > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution that

> > can work across geographies with required level of flexibility.

> >

> >

> >

> > Thanks,

> >

> > Swapnil

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <ja...@apache.org>]

> > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM

> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> >

> >

> >

> > Hi Vaibhav,

> >

> >

> >

> > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:

> >

> >

> >

> > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as mentioned

> earlier

> > to manage group transfer.

> >

> >

> >

> > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable

> > since

> we

> > may have an approval process before actual transfer.

> >

> >

> >

> > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to enable

> > shipment.

> >

> >

> >

> > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is selected,

> > a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be
created.

> >

> >

> >

> > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.

> >

> >

> >

> > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can only

> > be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.

> >

> >

> >

> > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.

> >

> >

> >

> > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to

> > specify the inventory item id for reservation.

> >

> >

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > James Yong

> >

> >

> >

> > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>

> wrote:

> >

> > > Hello Swapnil/James,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business

> >

> > > Requirements

> >

> > > like:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one

> > > product

> in

> >

> > >    any inventory transfer.

> >

> > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment

> which is

> >

> > >    missing.

> >

> > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with

> > > Accounting

> which

> >

> > >    is missing.

> >

> > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on

> inventory

> >

> > >    transfer.

> >

> > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"

> documentation.

> >

> > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.

> >

> > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with

> > > the

> >

> > >    respective transfer order.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order

> >

> > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a

> > > "Transfer

> >

> > > Order" for inventory transfer.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business

> > > does

> >

> > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should

> > > be

> >

> > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO

> >

> > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" is

> >

> > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of

> > > transfer

> >

> > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"

> workflow.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Please share your thoughts

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Thanks & Regards

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vaibhav Jain

> >

> > > Hotwax Systems,

> >

> > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com

> >

> > >

> >

> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <

> >

> > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Yes James,

> >

> > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with

> >

> > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer

> >

> > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data

> >

> > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with

> >

> > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,

> > InventoryTransferShipment.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Thanks & Regards,

> >

> > > > Swapnil

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org

> > > > <jamesyong@apache.org

> >]

> >

> > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM

> >

> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> >

> > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Hi Swapnil,

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.

> >

> > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common

> > > > info

> >

> > > > related to the group transfer.

> >

> > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer

> > > > will

> >

> > > > contain a FK to ITH.

> >

> > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Regards,

> >

> > > > James Yong

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah

> > > > <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>

> > wrote:

> >

> > > > > Folks,

> >

> > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any

> > > > > transfer

> >

> > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally

> > > > > for

> >

> > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment

> >

> > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory

> >

> > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence only

> > > > > one

> > product).

> >

> > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing

> >

> > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with

> > > > > a

> >

> > > > > single transfer

> >

> > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having

> >

> > > > > InventoryTransferId

> >

> > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well.

> >

> > > > > + Of

> >

> > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail
etc.

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and

> >

> > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> >

> > > > > Swapnil

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <

> jamesyong@apache.org>]

> >

> > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM

> >

> > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> >

> > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > Hi all,

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory

> > > > > Item

> >

> > > > > Detail

> >

> > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the

> > > > > Inventory

> >

> > > > > Transfer table.

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > What do you think?

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > Regards,

> >

> > > > > James Yong

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> >

> > > > > > Hi Suraj,

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item

> > > > > > Detail

> >

> > > > table?

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > Regards,

> >

> > > > > > James Yong

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana

> >

> > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>

> >

> > > > > wrote:

> >

> > > > > > > Hello,

> >

> > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item

> > > > > > > is

> >

> > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing

> >

> > > > > > > inventory

> >

> > > > transfer.

> >

> > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred

> >

> > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and

> > > > > > > quantity

> >

> > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item.

> > > > > > > Problem

> >

> > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact

> >

> > > > > > > quantity for which

> >

> > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.

> >

> > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at

> >

> > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history

> maintenance

> > of records.

> >

> > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.

> >

> > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > > --

> >

> > > > > > > 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

> >

> > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

>

Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Hello All,

Thanks Swapnil for the detailed business scenarios.

Thanks James for the reply.

I just want to convey that there is no need to use a separate data model
for inventory transfer. We can use order data model for inventory transfer.

We can create a SO from one facility which create an automated PO for
another facility. Inventory transfer will be done using sales/purchase
order.

Stock move is used for intra-warehouse inventory transfer while inventory
transfer is for inter-warehouse inventory transfer.

We can achieve inventory transfer using order data model instead of using
separate data model for inventory transfer.

   1. On the basis of from party and to party we can identify that order is
   transfer order(In transfer order fromParty and toParty are same).
   2. status of inventory transfer can be maintained in OrderStatus entity.
   3. Tax is applied or not can be configurable.
   4. Shipment is already associated with order data model.
   5. Order adjustment can be used to record adjustments.
   6. The Orderitem entity can be used to transfer multiple products at a
   time.
   7. Reservation and issuance are already working in order data model.
   8. The OrderContent entity can be used to attach Stock transfer
   document(legal document vary according to country law) with inventory
   transfer.

Please correct me if I missed something.

Thanks & Regards
--

Vaibhav Jain
Hotwax Systems,
vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:54 PM, James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Swapnil,
>
> You may want to consider having the following modifications:
>
> 1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e.
> InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory
> transfer with shipment.
>
> 2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.
>
> 3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as discussed
> earlier)
>
> Regards,
> James Yong
>
> On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock transfer
> > flow.
> >
> >
> >
> > As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., so
> > movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity. Here
> > are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of technical
> > trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current implementation) :
> >
> >    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but there
> is
> >    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and receiver as
> they
> >    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So business
> >    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or
> purchase
> >    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real time
> payment
> >    or invoice settlement required at either end.
> >    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its applicability
> >    varies depending upon the laws of the land or country/state-specific
> tax
> >    regulations. For example:
> >       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state might be
> >       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> > different rate in
> >       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
> > regulations can
> >       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
> > goods transfer
> >       are even taxable or not)
> >       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods transfer is
> now
> >       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
> >          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in this
> >          case, only a separate “Tax Invoice”* needs to be issued along
> with
> >          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on the
> > inter-state
> >          regulations while crossing the state borders)
> >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having single
> >          registration for originating and receiving branches with tax
> > authority then *there
> >          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be issue.
> >          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
> >          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having
> different
> >          registration for originating and receiving branches with tax
> > authority then *there
> >          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate “Tax
> Invoice”*
> >          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
> >       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to the state
> >       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in this case.
> >    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status transitioning
> >    i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ (from originating
> facility) à
> >    ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination facility). As it needs to be
> >    tracked internally.
> >    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the
> transferred
> >    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL accounts
> per
> >    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in
> accordance
> >    with business rules).
> >    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically build
> the
> >    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the individual
> >    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement for a
> common
> >    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
> >    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets implemented)
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution that can
> > work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Swapnil
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Vaibhav,
> >
> >
> >
> > My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> >
> >
> >
> > We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as mentioned
> earlier
> > to manage group transfer.
> >
> >
> >
> > Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable since
> we
> > may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> >
> >
> >
> > User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to enable
> > shipment.
> >
> >
> >
> > When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is selected, a
> > corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be created.
> >
> >
> >
> > You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.
> >
> >
> >
> > No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can only be
> > made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> >
> >
> >
> > There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> >
> >
> >
> > There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to specify
> > the inventory item id for reservation.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > James Yong
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Swapnil/James,
> >
> > >
> >
> > > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> >
> > > Requirements
> >
> > > like:
> >
> > >
> >
> > >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one product
> in
> >
> > >    any inventory transfer.
> >
> > >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment
> which is
> >
> > >    missing.
> >
> > >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with Accounting
> which
> >
> > >    is missing.
> >
> > >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on
> inventory
> >
> > >    transfer.
> >
> > >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring"
> documentation.
> >
> > >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> >
> > >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with the
> >
> > >    respective transfer order.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
> >
> > > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a "Transfer
> >
> > > Order" for inventory transfer.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business does
> >
> > > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should be
> >
> > > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO
> >
> > > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" is
> >
> > > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of transfer
> >
> > > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product"
> workflow.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Please share your thoughts
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Thanks & Regards
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Vaibhav Jain
> >
> > > Hotwax Systems,
> >
> > > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> >
> > >
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> >
> > > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > Yes James,
> >
> > > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> >
> > > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer
> >
> > > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data
> >
> > > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
> >
> > > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> > InventoryTransferShipment.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > > > Swapnil
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <jamesyong@apache.org
> >]
> >
> > > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> >
> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >
> > > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Hi Swapnil,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> >
> > > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> >
> > > > related to the group transfer.
> >
> > > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will
> >
> > > > contain a FK to ITH.
> >
> > > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Regards,
> >
> > > > James Yong
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Folks,
> >
> > > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> >
> > > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> >
> > > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment
> >
> > > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
> >
> > > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one
> > product).
> >
> > > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing
> >
> > > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a
> >
> > > > > single transfer
> >
> > > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> >
> > > > > InventoryTransferId
> >
> > > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well.
> >
> > > > > + Of
> >
> > > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and
> >
> > > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > > > > Swapnil
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <
> jamesyong@apache.org>]
> >
> > > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> >
> > > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> >
> > > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Hi all,
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> >
> > > > > Detail
> >
> > > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> >
> > > > > Transfer table.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > What do you think?
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Regards,
> >
> > > > > James Yong
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Hi Suraj,
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> >
> > > > table?
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > Regards,
> >
> > > > > > James Yong
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> >
> > > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> >
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > Hello,
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> >
> > > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
> >
> > > > > > > inventory
> >
> > > > transfer.
> >
> > > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred
> >
> > > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity
> >
> > > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. Problem
> >
> > > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact
> >
> > > > > > > quantity for which
> >
> > > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> >
> > > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history
> maintenance
> > of records.
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > > --
> >
> > > > > > > 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
> >
> > > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
>

Re: RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi Swapnil,

You may want to consider having the following modifications:

1) Item Issuance & Shipment Receipt entities: Add columns (i.e. InventoryTransferHeaderId & InventoryTransferId ) to support inventory transfer with shipment.

2) Inventory Transfer Adjustment entity: For the tax.

3) Inventory Transfer Header entity: For group transfer (as discussed earlier)

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-19 19:12, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock transfer
> flow.
> 
> 
> 
> As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., so
> movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity. Here
> are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of technical
> trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current implementation) :
> 
>    - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but there is
>    no real time money exchange involved between shipper and receiver as they
>    are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So business
>    might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or purchase
>    invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real time payment
>    or invoice settlement required at either end.
>    - In financial terms there are tax implications but its applicability
>    varies depending upon the laws of the land or country/state-specific tax
>    regulations. For example:
>       - In US the very same item transferred in certain state might be
>       taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
> different rate in
>       another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
> regulations can
>       throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
> goods transfer
>       are even taxable or not)
>       - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods transfer is now
>       shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
>          - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in this
>          case, only a separate âTax Invoiceâ* needs to be issued along with
>          stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on the
> inter-state
>          regulations while crossing the state borders)
>          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having single
>          registration for originating and receiving branches with tax
> authority then *there
>          is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be issue.
>          Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
>          - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having different
>          registration for originating and receiving branches with tax
> authority then *there
>          is tax liability and in this case, only a separate âTax Invoiceâ*
>          needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
>       - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to the state
>       only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in this case.
>    - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status transitioning
>    i.e. âRequestedâ Ã  âIn-reviewâ Ã  âShippedâ (from originating facility) Ã 
>    âIn-transitâ Ã  âReceivedâ (at destination facility). As it needs to be
>    tracked internally.
>    - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the transferred
>    goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL accounts per
>    store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in accordance
>    with business rules).
>    - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically build the
>    Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the individual
>    product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement for a common
>    destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
>    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets implemented)
> 
> 
> 
> I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution that can
> work across geographies with required level of flexibility.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Swapnil
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Vaibhav,
> 
> 
> 
> My random thoughts on the possible implementation:
> 
> 
> 
> We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as mentioned earlier
> to manage group transfer.
> 
> 
> 
> Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable since we
> may have an approval process before actual transfer.
> 
> 
> 
> User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to enable
> shipment.
> 
> 
> 
> When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is selected, a
> corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be created.
> 
> 
> 
> You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.
> 
> 
> 
> No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can only be
> made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.
> 
> 
> 
> There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.
> 
> 
> 
> There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to specify
> the inventory item id for reservation.
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> James Yong
> 
> 
> 
> On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hello Swapnil/James,
> 
> >
> 
> > There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business
> 
> > Requirements
> 
> > like:
> 
> >
> 
> >    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one product in
> 
> >    any inventory transfer.
> 
> >    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment which is
> 
> >    missing.
> 
> >    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with Accounting which
> 
> >    is missing.
> 
> >    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on inventory
> 
> >    transfer.
> 
> >    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" documentation.
> 
> >    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
> 
> >    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with the
> 
> >    respective transfer order.
> 
> >
> 
> > Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order
> 
> > management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a "Transfer
> 
> > Order" for inventory transfer.
> 
> >
> 
> > Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business does
> 
> > not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should be
> 
> > created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO
> 
> > workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" is
> 
> > useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of transfer
> 
> > order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product" workflow.
> 
> >
> 
> > Please share your thoughts
> 
> >
> 
> > Thanks & Regards
> 
> >
> 
> > Vaibhav Jain
> 
> > Hotwax Systems,
> 
> > vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> 
> >
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> 
> > swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > > Yes James,
> 
> > > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> 
> > > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer
> 
> > > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data
> 
> > > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with
> 
> > > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
> InventoryTransferShipment.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> 
> > > Swapnil
> 
> > >
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> 
> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <ja...@apache.org>]
> 
> > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> 
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> 
> > > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Hi Swapnil,
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> 
> > > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> 
> > > related to the group transfer.
> 
> > > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will
> 
> > > contain a FK to ITH.
> 
> > > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Regards,
> 
> > > James Yong
> 
> > >
> 
> > > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > > > Folks,
> 
> > > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> 
> > > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> 
> > > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment
> 
> > > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory
> 
> > > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one
> product).
> 
> > > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing
> 
> > > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a
> 
> > > > single transfer
> 
> > > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having
> 
> > > > InventoryTransferId
> 
> > > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well.
> 
> > > > + Of
> 
> > > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and
> 
> > > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> 
> > > > Swapnil
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> 
> > > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <ja...@apache.org>]
> 
> > > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> 
> > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> 
> > > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > Hi all,
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> 
> > > > Detail
> 
> > > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> 
> > > > Transfer table.
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > What do you think?
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > Regards,
> 
> > > > James Yong
> 
> > > >
> 
> > > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > > > > Hi Suraj,
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> 
> > > table?
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > > > > Regards,
> 
> > > > > James Yong
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana
> 
> > > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> 
> > > > wrote:
> 
> > > > > > Hello,
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> 
> > > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing
> 
> > > > > > inventory
> 
> > > transfer.
> 
> > > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred
> 
> > > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity
> 
> > > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. Problem
> 
> > > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact
> 
> > > > > > quantity for which
> 
> > > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at
> 
> > > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history maintenance
> of records.
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > > > > > --
> 
> > > > > > 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
> 
> > > > > >
> 
> > > > >
> 
> > > >
> 
> > >
> 
> >
>

RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Let me try adding few more insights/details with regard to stock transfer
flow.



As we are referring to intra-organizational goods movement i.e., so
movement of goods would be for and within the same business entity. Here
are few pointers (if it can help in assessing any kind of technical
trade-off that needs to be made with respect to current implementation) :

   - Stock Transfer per se are going to involve goods exchange but there is
   no real time money exchange involved between shipper and receiver as they
   are both the very same business entity in the legal sense. So business
   might not be necessarily interested in generating any sales or purchase
   invoice against such transactions. Nor will there be any real time payment
   or invoice settlement required at either end.
   - In financial terms there are tax implications but its applicability
   varies depending upon the laws of the land or country/state-specific tax
   regulations. For example:
      - In US the very same item transferred in certain state might be
      taxable at certain rate but totally exempted or taxed at
different rate in
      another (someone with better understanding of US or EUR tax
regulations can
      throw more light and let us know if currently intra-company
goods transfer
      are even taxable or not)
      - In India, the tax implications in the case of goods transfer is now
      shifted on the supply of goods. As a result:
         - For inter-state transfer *there is tax liability and in this
         case, only a separate “Tax Invoice”* needs to be issued along with
         stock transfer note and supporting document (depending on the
inter-state
         regulations while crossing the state borders)
         - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having single
         registration for originating and receiving branches with tax
authority then *there
         is no tax liability and hence no Tax Invoice *needs to be issue.
         Only Delivery Note should suffice to transfer the goods.
         - For intra-state transfers if business entity is having different
         registration for originating and receiving branches with tax
authority then *there
         is tax liability and in this case, only a separate “Tax Invoice”*
         needs to be issued along with stock transfer note.
      - Any kind of applicable tax (if any) needs to be paid to the state
      only and a separate Tax Invoice needs to be generated in this case.
   - The transfer shipment needs to follow certain status transitioning
   i.e. ‘Requested’ à ‘In-review’ à ‘Shipped’ (from originating facility) à
   ‘In-transit’ à ‘Received’ (at destination facility). As it needs to be
   tracked internally.
   - The deemed transaction value and tax liability against the transferred
   goods should hit the accounting books against appropriate GL accounts per
   store and a separate GL account against the tax authority (in accordance
   with business rules).
   - Later at some point of time we may also like to systemically build the
   Transfer Requirement Planning and consolidate all the individual
   product-wise transfer ad-hoc or planned requests/requirement for a common
   destination facility (i.e., once any feature like
   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6964 gets implemented)



I hope it should help to come up with a generic enough solution that can
work across geographies with required level of flexibility.



Thanks,

Swapnil



-----Original Message-----
From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:56 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records



Hi Vaibhav,



My random thoughts on the possible implementation:



We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as mentioned earlier
to manage group transfer.



Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable since we
may have an approval process before actual transfer.



User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to enable
shipment.



When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is selected, a
corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be created.



You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.



No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can only be
made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.



There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.



There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to specify
the inventory item id for reservation.



Regards,

James Yong



On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> Hello Swapnil/James,

>

> There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business

> Requirements

> like:

>

>    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one product in

>    any inventory transfer.

>    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment which is

>    missing.

>    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with Accounting which

>    is missing.

>    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on inventory

>    transfer.

>    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" documentation.

>    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.

>    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with the

>    respective transfer order.

>

> Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order

> management system. Hence we should have a flow to create a "Transfer

> Order" for inventory transfer.

>

> Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business does

> not have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should be

> created to receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO

> workflow and want to receive the product then "Receive product" is

> useful. Same for inventory transfer we should have a flow of transfer

> order and inventory transfer can be used like "Receive Product" workflow.

>

> Please share your thoughts

>

> Thanks & Regards

>

> Vaibhav Jain

> Hotwax Systems,

> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com

>

> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <

> swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

>

> > Yes James,

> > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with

> > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer

> > create corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data

> > integrity. Also, We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with

> > Shipment through ITH itself or a separate entity e.g.,
InventoryTransferShipment.

> >

> > Thanks & Regards,

> > Swapnil

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <ja...@apache.org>]

> > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM

> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> >

> > Hi Swapnil,

> >

> > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.

> > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info

> > related to the group transfer.

> > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will

> > contain a FK to ITH.

> > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.

> >

> > Regards,

> > James Yong

> >

> > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:

> > > Folks,

> > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer

> > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for

> > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment

> > > against transfer request so as to be cost effective.

> > >

> > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory

> > > transfer can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one
product).

> > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing

> > > design such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a

> > > single transfer

> > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having

> > > InventoryTransferId

> > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well.

> > > + Of

> > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.

> > >

> > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and

> > > then we can try to support it if it is generic enough.

> > >

> > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > Swapnil

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org <ja...@apache.org>]

> > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM

> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org

> > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

> > >

> > > Hi all,

> > >

> > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item

> > > Detail

> > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory

> > > Transfer table.

> > >

> > > What do you think?

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > James Yong

> > >

> > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> > > > Hi Suraj,

> > > >

> > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail

> > table?

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > James Yong

> > > >

> > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana

> > > > <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > Hello,

> > > > >

> > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is

> > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing

> > > > > inventory

> > transfer.

> > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred

> > > > > quantity anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity

> > > > > is only available on the newly created inventory item. Problem

> > > > > is, it gets deluded on time being and user won't get exact

> > > > > quantity for which

> > > inventory transfer was initialized.

> > > > >

> > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at

> > > > > *InventoryTransfer *entity as well for proper history maintenance
of records.

> > > > >

> > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.

> > > > >

> > > > > --

> > > > > 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

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi Vaibhav,

My random thoughts on the possible implementation:

We can have a new InventoryTransferHeader (ITH) entity as mentioned earlier to manage group transfer. 

Having Quality attribute to InventoryTransfer entity is reasonable since we may have an approval process before actual transfer.

User doing inventory transfer can have an Shipment option to enable shipment. 

When inventory transfer is approval and Shipment option is selected, a corresponding Sales Order (SO) and Purchase Order (PO) will be created.

You may want to use a different Order Type for these transfer SO & PO.

No direct changes are allowed for transfer SO & PO. Changes can only be made at ITH and the associated Inventory Transfer entities.

There should be an attribute in SO & PO to link to ITH.

There is also a need to enhance the reservation function of SO to specify the inventory item id for reservation.

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-16 23:05, Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Hello Swapnil/James,
> 
> There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business Requirements
> like:
> 
>    1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one product in
>    any inventory transfer.
>    2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment which is
>    missing.
>    3. Inventory transfer should have an association with Accounting which
>    is missing.
>    4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on inventory
>    transfer.
>    5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" documentation.
>    6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
>    7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with the
>    respective transfer order.
> 
> Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order management
> system. Hence we should have a flow to create a "Transfer Order" for
> inventory transfer.
> 
> Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business does not
> have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should be created to
> receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO workflow and want to
> receive the product then "Receive product" is useful. Same for inventory
> transfer we should have a flow of transfer order and inventory transfer can
> be used like "Receive Product" workflow.
> 
> Please share your thoughts
> 
> Thanks & Regards
> 
> Vaibhav Jain
> Hotwax Systems,
> vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com
> 
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
> swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> 
> > Yes James,
> > ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> > InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer create
> > corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data integrity. Also,
> > We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through ITH itself or
> > a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Swapnil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > Hi Swapnil,
> >
> > Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> > InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> > related to the group transfer.
> > For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will contain
> > a FK to ITH.
> > For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > > Folks,
> > > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> > > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> > > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment against
> > > transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> > >
> > > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer
> > > can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product).
> > > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing design
> > > such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a single
> > > transfer
> > > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having InventoryTransferId
> > > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of
> > > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> > >
> > > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then we
> > > can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > Swapnil
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> > > Detail
> > > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> > > Transfer table.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James Yong
> > >
> > > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Hi Suraj,
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> > table?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > James Yong
> > > >
> > > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> > > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing inventory
> > transfer.
> > > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity
> > > > > anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only
> > > > > available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is, it gets
> > > > > deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity for which
> > > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > > > >
> > > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer
> > > > > *entity as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Vaibhav Jain <va...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Hello Swapnil/James,

There are many dependencies of inventory transfer in Business Requirements
like:

   1. In Inventory transfer generally, there is more than one product in
   any inventory transfer.
   2. Inventory transfer should have an association with Shipment which is
   missing.
   3. Inventory transfer should have an association with Accounting which
   is missing.
   4. Tax should be calculated(Applicable in India after GST) on inventory
   transfer.
   5. If the tax is exempted then need "Stock transferring" documentation.
   6. Tracking of Transferred inventory.
   7. Tracking of associated peoples(Picker, Packer, driver) with the
   respective transfer order.

Most of the attribute of inventory transfer is belongs to Order management
system. Hence we should have a flow to create a "Transfer Order" for
inventory transfer.

Inventory Transfer can be treated as "Receive product". Business does not
have workflows to receive the product directly i.e. PO should be created to
receive the product. If anyone wants to surpass the PO workflow and want to
receive the product then "Receive product" is useful. Same for inventory
transfer we should have a flow of transfer order and inventory transfer can
be used like "Receive Product" workflow.

Please share your thoughts

Thanks & Regards

Vaibhav Jain
Hotwax Systems,
vaibhav.jain@hotwaxsystems.com

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Swapnil Shah <
swapnil.shah@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> Yes James,
> ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
> InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer create
> corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data integrity. Also,
> We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through ITH itself or
> a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Swapnil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>
> Hi Swapnil,
>
> Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
> InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
> related to the group transfer.
> For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will contain
> a FK to ITH.
> For single transfer, ITH can be empty.
>
> Regards,
> James Yong
>
> On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> > Folks,
> > One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> > request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> > multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment against
> > transfer request so as to be cost effective.
> >
> > Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer
> > can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product).
> > Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing design
> > such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a single
> > transfer
> > (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having InventoryTransferId
> > + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of
> > course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> >
> > Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then we
> > can try to support it if it is generic enough.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Swapnil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> > Detail
> > (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> > Transfer table.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Suraj,
> > >
> > > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
> table?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James Yong
> > >
> > > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> > > > created and successfully gets updated after completing inventory
> transfer.
> > > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity
> > > > anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only
> > > > available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is, it gets
> > > > deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity for which
> > inventory transfer was initialized.
> > > >
> > > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer
> > > > *entity as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> > > >
> > > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

RE: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Yes James,
ITH should work. I would prefer to have ITH tightly coupled with
InventoryTransfer(IT) i.e. even in case of single item transfer create
corresponding entries in ITH and IT both to maintain data integrity. Also,
We can try tying up Inventory Transfer with Shipment through ITH itself or
a separate entity e.g., InventoryTransferShipment.

Thanks & Regards,
Swapnil

-----Original Message-----
From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:26 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Hi Swapnil,

Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g.
InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info
related to the group transfer.
For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will contain
a FK to ITH.
For single transfer, ITH can be empty.

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> Folks,
> One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer
> request initiated from one facility to another is generally for
> multiple products as they all need to go in a single shipment against
> transfer request so as to be cost effective.
>
> Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer
> can only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product).
> Would it make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing design
> such that multiple products/inventory can be tied with a single
> transfer
> (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having InventoryTransferId
> + InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of
> course by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
>
> Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then we
> can try to support it if it is generic enough.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Swapnil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
>
> Hi all,
>
> It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item
> Detail
> (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> Transfer table.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Regards,
> James Yong
>
> On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi Suraj,
> >
> > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail
table?
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is
> > > created and successfully gets updated after completing inventory
transfer.
> > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity
> > > anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only
> > > available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is, it gets
> > > deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity for which
> inventory transfer was initialized.
> > >
> > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer
> > > *entity as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> > >
> > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >
> >
>

Re: RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi Swapnil,

Another possible solution is to have an header entity, e.g. InventoryTransferHeader (ITH), containing additional or common info related to the group transfer. 
For group transfer, ITH is created and each InventoryTransfer will contain a FK to ITH. 
For single transfer, ITH can be empty.

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-14 18:59, Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Folks,
> One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer request
> initiated from one facility to another is generally for multiple products
> as they all need to go in a single shipment against transfer request so as
> to be cost effective.
> 
> Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer can
> only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product). Would it
> make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing design such that
> multiple products/inventory can be tied with a single transfer
> (InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having InventoryTransferId +
> InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of course
> by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.
> 
> Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then we can
> try to support it if it is generic enough.
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Swapnil
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item Detail
> (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
> Transfer table.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Regards,
> James Yong
> 
> On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi Suraj,
> >
> > Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail table?
> >
> > Regards,
> > James Yong
> >
> > On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is created
> > > and successfully gets updated after completing inventory transfer.
> > > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity
> > > anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only
> > > available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is, it gets
> > > deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity for which
> inventory transfer was initialized.
> > >
> > > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer
> > > *entity as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> > >
> > > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >
> >
>

RE: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by Swapnil Shah <sw...@hotwaxsystems.com>.

Folks,
One very frequent use case that we encounter is that any transfer request
initiated from one facility to another is generally for multiple products
as they all need to go in a single shipment against transfer request so as
to be cost effective.

Current schema has the limitation that any given inventory transfer can
only be for single inventory item (and hence only one product). Would it
make sense and be feasible if we enhance the existing design such that
multiple products/inventory can be tied with a single transfer
(InventoryTransferId) request (possibly by having InventoryTransferId +
InventoryItemId as PK) and shipment is tied up with it as well. Of course
by leaving a proper audit trail via InventoryItemDetail etc.

Let's share any further thoughts or similar business cases and then we can
try to support it if it is generic enough.

Thanks & Regards,
Swapnil

-----Original Message-----
From: James Yong [mailto:jamesyong@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:36 PM
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Hi all,

It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item Detail
(IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory
Transfer table.

What do you think?

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Suraj,
>
> Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail table?
>
> Regards,
> James Yong
>
> On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is created
> > and successfully gets updated after completing inventory transfer.
> > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity
> > anywhere in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only
> > available on the newly created inventory item. Problem is, it gets
> > deluded on time being and user won't get exact quantity for which
inventory transfer was initialized.
> >
> > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer
> > *entity as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> >
> > Please share your thoughts on this.
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>

Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi all,

It is better to add InventoryTransferId column to Inventory Item Detail (IID) table so that we easily link the IID record to the Inventory Transfer table. 

What do you think?

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-13 23:18, "James Yong"<ja...@apache.org> wrote: 
> Hi Suraj,
> 
> Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail table?
> 
> Regards,
> James Yong
> 
> On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is created and
> > successfully gets updated after completing inventory transfer.
> > As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity anywhere
> > in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only available on the newly
> > created inventory item. Problem is, it gets deluded on time being and user
> > won't get exact quantity for which inventory transfer was initialized.
> > 
> > IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer *entity
> > as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> > 
> > Please share your thoughts on this.
> > 
> > --
> > 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
> > 
>

Re: Quantity missing for inventory transfer records

Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.

Hi Suraj,

Shouldn't the transfer detail be stored at Inventory Item Detail table?

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-10-13 16:44, Suraj Khurana <su...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: 
> Hello,
> 
> While creating inventory transfers, a new inventory item is created and
> successfully gets updated after completing inventory transfer.
> As per current implementation, we don't store transferred quantity anywhere
> in *InventoryTransfer *entity and quantity is only available on the newly
> created inventory item. Problem is, it gets deluded on time being and user
> won't get exact quantity for which inventory transfer was initialized.
> 
> IMO, we should maintain transferred quantity at *InventoryTransfer *entity
> as well for proper history maintenance of records.
> 
> Please share your thoughts on this.
> 
> --
> 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
>