IDempiere/FullMeeting20140521

⇐ Table of Contents | Full Meeting Minutes | Full Meeting 2014-05-21

CarlosRuiz: Good morning
nmicoud: Bonjour
tbayen: Daarestiet!
nmicoud: any idea for the last comment on https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1899 ?
CarlosRuiz: nmicoud, I would like to integrate it as is if you don't mind - and see if somebody else can improve it with your idea
nmicoud: yes, no problem
tbayen: I do not understand your last comment. I see on your screenshot that the images are broken. I do not understand when are they shown and when not?
nmicoud: they are not shown when you write the email dialog, but shown when you read the received email
tbayen: ah, ok. I understand.
tbayen: If noone has big problems to discuss I want to ask what do you think about https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1955 ?
tbayen: This will "solve" some kinds of problems for non-accounting installations and be a help for bad maintained translations.
CarlosRuiz: yes - I have a file like that for starting all installations
CarlosRuiz: in some installations I just install that file and then via SQL inactivate all the created accounts
tbayen: If you inactivate the default accounts you can not close any document, can't you?!?
CarlosRuiz: in my file I added a summary node called "Not Configured Default Accounts" and grouped accounts there
CarlosRuiz: accounting is independent process - you can do everything except posting
tbayen: What do you think about using it automatic if a user does not set a coa file?
CarlosRuiz: already discussed at https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1685
tbayen: I found the very same just in this second. :-)
CarlosRuiz: what about a flag "no initial accounting" (comment -> you can activate it later)
tbayen: What exactly happens if the account is inactivated and you close a document? Will it be closed but not posted? Without an error message about that fact?
CarlosRuiz: accounting is independent - doesn't affect the workflows
tbayen: The thinking behind this coa is to have the whole "coa thing" out of the way. If we think this to the end then inactivating sounds like the right idea. But on the other hand you can use this as an the "smalles possible coa file" and use it for real accounting.
aguerra_: Hi everybody!!!!
CarlosRuiz: tbayen, I think they are different problems -> no accounting <> minimum accounting
CarlosRuiz: Hi aguerra_
CarlosRuiz: if user will use accounting (even minimum) then I think is fine he must know what he's doing and choose a proper CoA
tbayen: CarlosRuiz, yes. This leads to the need to document it. :-) All ways lead to the old same story...
CarlosRuiz: if user is not going to use accounting then sounds ok to have a flag and create automatically those accounts and even inactivate them
CarlosRuiz: it is documented
CarlosRuiz: there are several pages documenting client creation - this is one of those http://www.adempiere.com/Initial_Client_Setup_Process
hieplq: or add a combobox with three option (blank:must choose COA file, no account: inactive account, min account: for default file)
tbayen: We talked about coa files in the german community. My feeing is that this area needs much more documentation. Or it needs a good way to get it out of the way for those who do not care.
CarlosRuiz: writing a draft here ...
Edwin_Ang: Hi everyone
CarlosRuiz: Hi Edwin_Ang
Edwin_Ang: Hi Carlos
hieplq: CarlosRuiz, please help in this ticket. https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1957 it's ok to add to core?
hieplq: i need know to continue improve IDEMPIERE-1334
CarlosRuiz: how's the usage of 1957? programatically?
hieplq: I can add more info (tooltip, help, desc) to infoProcess table, after that. call new function when user focus a process button
hieplq: => tooltip panel is update
CarlosRuiz: ah good
hieplq: IDEMPIERE-1334 is almost finish, you can quick review and give me advice
CarlosRuiz: ok - will try to check 1334 later .. let me finish the draft for CoA
CarlosRuiz: tbayen, just noticed you can have a CoA file with just one account :-)
tbayen: I expected errors if accounts are missing.
tbayen: Which is the magic one?!? DEFAULT?
CarlosRuiz: look here http://pastebin.com/x6U9c7cd
CarlosRuiz: tbayen, did you receive my pastebin link? my wifi died
tbayen: Yes, I received it.
CarlosRuiz: ok - I'm ready to publish the draft
CarlosRuiz: not a draft - I already tested it - but I'll appreciate your tests
tbayen: I think about what is better. Your solution creates only one account. My solution can be easier transfered into a fully functional accounting later. I wonder if one or the other is better or if they are for different usecases.
CarlosRuiz: yes - I think the "one account" is useful just if you're not going to use accounts
CarlosRuiz: just found curious that option is available
CarlosRuiz: ok - I uploaded the patch
CarlosRuiz: it creates three new parameters on the Initial Client Setup process
CarlosRuiz: Use Activity Dimension, Use Default CoA, Inactivate Defaults
CarlosRuiz: if you set Use Default CoA - then CoAFile parameter is hidden
CarlosRuiz: also added your CoA file with one summary account and created the logic to summarize it there
CarlosRuiz: I think it will work in a server installation out of the box
CarlosRuiz: but to test in eclipse you need to set a sysconfig key
CarlosRuiz: DEFAULT_COA_PATH
CarlosRuiz: with the path pointing to your test file
CarlosRuiz: in my case was pointing to
CarlosRuiz: /home/carlos/hgAdempiere/localosgi/org.adempiere.server-feature/data/import/AccountingDefaultsOnly.csv
tbayen: ok. I will test if this evening.
tbayen: For me it is not sure why you need a sysconfig key. Can't you get it out of the classpath?
CarlosRuiz: the default location of the default file is
CarlosRuiz: {idempiere_home}/data/import/AccountingDefaultsOnly.csv
CarlosRuiz: that's ok on server
CarlosRuiz: but not ok within eclipse
CarlosRuiz: but also the sysconfig key is intentional - it allows you to set a different default file for your installation (i.e in spanish for me)
tbayen: ok
tbayen: My thought were that someone who cares about language and such would load an dedicated coa file and not use defaults. But to have this possibility can not be bad.
CarlosRuiz: or maybe somebody could like the "just one account" approach - and is just change the sysconfig
tbayen: Yes - it gives more possibilities for the implementor.
norbertbede: hi all
CarlosRuiz: Hi norbertbede
CarlosRuiz: ah bitbucket changed layout
CarlosRuiz: https://bitbucket.org/idempiere/idempiere/
CarlosRuiz: "There isn't a README yet
CarlosRuiz: Create one and tell people where to start and how to contribute"
CarlosRuiz: any volunteer to create a good README there?
norbertbede: @carlos is it right time to review this issue http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1334 Run one or more processes from Info Window ?
CarlosRuiz: I'm on it - hieplq asked me first to review 1957 which is dependent
norbertbede: we want to finish this if possible with hiep. continue other our features
norbertbede: ah ok.
norbertbede: i joined to chate late…thanks
CarlosRuiz: hieplq, still here?
hieplq: yes. i'm here
CarlosRuiz: there are three files attached to 1334
CarlosRuiz: is the last enough? or I must apply several?
hieplq: just last
hieplq: and .zip is packin data
CarlosRuiz: no migration script with official IDs?
hieplq: i will make it after you review code.
CarlosRuiz: cannot merge either - some files rejected
CarlosRuiz: org.adempiere.ui.zk/WEB-INF/src/org/adempiere/webui/apps/ProcessModalDialog.java.rej
CarlosRuiz: org.adempiere.ui.zk/theme/default/css/fragment/form.css.dsp.rej
CarlosRuiz: form.css.dsp doesn't exist
hieplq: i can merge it with last zk7 brank. please wait me test with dev brank
CarlosRuiz: ah - I'm not using zk7
CarlosRuiz: zk7 has not been merged with latest changes on process dialog
hieplq: ok. i will fix now. please wait me
tbayen: I see that the table c_bp_relation has its own window. Why is it not a register in the bpartner window? Is it just a menu design decision or is there a technical reason I do not see?
CarlosRuiz: don't know what JJ was thinking at that time :-) but usually you put a window in its own menu when you want easier role control
CarlosRuiz: in this case would be something like - if you want a role able to configure relations, but not able to configure partners
tbayen: ok. thanks
hieplq: CarlosRuiz, I update patch. please help me review. i will retest it
CarlosRuiz: ok
CarlosRuiz: hieplq?
hieplq: i'm here
CarlosRuiz: would be possible to create a column on infoprocess - instead of the sysconfig keys
CarlosRuiz: with the three options that you put there - button, droplist, dialog
CarlosRuiz: and you paint buttons according to each definition
hieplq: yes. it can
CarlosRuiz: and you can combine different type of buttons on the same window? or too complex?
hieplq: "combine different type of buttons on the same window" you can more detail?
CarlosRuiz: so, I think you could have direct buttons - other less used in droplist - and others even less used on a dialog
hieplq: ah. i know
CarlosRuiz: if you add this column replacing the sysconfig - i.e. AD_InfoColumn.ButtonType
CarlosRuiz: then you can define where you want the button - and possibly you have the three types
hieplq: yes. it can with no complex
hieplq: 1. in infoWindow add column layoutStyle, in each infoProcess add column groupLayoutStyle.
CarlosRuiz: column layout?
CarlosRuiz: ah no - the first is not needed
hieplq: when all infoProcess have groupLayoutStyle = null => all button in layout of infoWindow
CarlosRuiz: I think just the second
CarlosRuiz: with a default of your preference
hieplq: 1 is for implement like add all buton in a style
hieplq: he not need define in each infoprocess row
CarlosRuiz: no need for that if you can do it in detail - and the volume is not that high
hieplq: ok. i will try with preference
CarlosRuiz: preference?
hieplq: "with a default of your preference" i think you mean use preference to set default for all button in a info window
CarlosRuiz: no
CarlosRuiz: I mean just set a default for the column - the one you like more
CarlosRuiz: or in the code just check - if ButtonLayout is empty then assume your preferred
hieplq: huh. it's ok with me. but add a column to infoWindow is easy for other config.
CarlosRuiz: just keep it simple
hieplq: ok. no problem. will make that.
CarlosRuiz: hieplq, just committed a change to InfoWindow and InfoPanel - so, please pull for your new patch
hieplq: ok.