Re: CRM was What's with SalesOpportunity

[BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>]

I am starting to sound like david, which I guess is a good thing.
I would like to see the CRM stick to the entities we already have.
it seems a major duplication of effort to have two copies of information
floating around.

Also that all function of the CRM stay in the folders that best support
them. Marketing, Orders, Party.
then in a CRM and/or SFA folder add UI that consolidate the screens in
the individual folders.
in the CRM and/or SFA folders you can add code for tickets (ContactMech
party and marketing) auto generation. this is done when a communications
events finds a email from a partyID  that is already in the database.

BJ Freeman sent the following on 4/3/2007 3:26 PM:
> Why not use the contact list for sales opportunities and put in marketing.
> 
> Al Byers sent the following on 4/3/2007 10:36 AM:
>> I am looking at the screens that could be attached to SO and, obviously,
>> the
>> ones for which there are entity relations are candidates. I noticed in
>> SugarCRM that they have "Activities" (ie. WorkEffort) as one of the
>> associated screens, but communications are not. Neither is there a relation
>> from SO to CommunicationEvent. Should all communications be attached to
>> WorkEfforts or Parties? Why not a relation directly to SalesOpportunity as
>> with WorkEffort?
>>
>> -Al
>>
>> On 4/3/07, Al Byers <by...@automationgroups.com> wrote:
>>> A quick search on SalesOpportunity shows almost no functionality. Am I
>>> missing something? Is this handled some other way? If not, I have a
>>> need and
>>> am willing to code the basic admin screens. Any thoughts on what might be
>>> needed more than that?
>>>
>>> -Al
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
>