[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ledger-smb-users Digest, Vol 30, Issue 7
- Subject: Re: Ledger-smb-users Digest, Vol 30, Issue 7
- From: Matthew Kent <..hidden..>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:18:49 +0200
We have a small problem I hope you can provide some insight on. Our
data capturer has captured payments for invoices through the general
ledger section as apposed to capturing them against invoices. Is there
a way we can link these payments to the invoices so that our debtors
balances correctly? I am fairly competent with databases as I am a
developer myself, so if there is a way we can create the association
in the database I will be prepared to try that route as apposed to
undoing all the work done to this point.
Regards,
Matthew Kent
..hidden..
www.solveur.co.za
031 764 5450
On 19 Feb 2009, at 6:55 AM, ..hidden..
wrote:
Send Ledger-smb-users mailing list submissions to
..hidden..
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
..hidden..
You can reach the person managing the list at
..hidden..
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ledger-smb-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Clickable Part Numbers (Jeff Kowalczyk)
2. Re: How to deal with Paypal fees/cashback (Ed W)
3. Re: Clickable Part Numbers (Ed W)
4. Re: On Hand correction (Ed W)
5. Re: Clickable Part Numbers (Chris Travers)
6. Re: On Hand correction (Chris Travers)
7. Re: On Hand correction (Chris Travers)
8. Re: Clickable Part Numbers (Stroller)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:22:18 -0500
From: Jeff Kowalczyk <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] Clickable Part Numbers
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID: <..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Richard wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible to make the (Part) Number field in
Invoices and Quotations link to the Part record? The requirement is
that
when creating them, particularly a Quote, I often need to put a part
on
order, or check that it already is, and this is quite cumbersome at
the
moment. Is this a requirement anyone else has?
I think its a good usability feature for the LedgerSMB branches/1.2
version, although such a change won't be incorporated into a maintenance
branch.
IIRC, the misfeature of the current 1.2 UI is that if the user edits the
part number for an instantiated line item, it does not search for a new
part in that lineitem slot. I think the user can even save the document
with an arbitrarily altered partnumber, since the hidden parts.id is
used
for identity.
If that's the case, then clickable partnumber links to parts definitions
may be appropriate/improvement in some but not all use cases.
Better to evaluate trunk (1.3) behavior before planning modifications,
though.
Jeff
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:40:23 +0000
From: Ed W <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] How to deal with Paypal fees/cashback
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID: <..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Chris Travers wrote:
I would just use GL transactions, against a bank charges and an
interest account.
Some people use the words "banking discounts" to mean the same as
"expense".
I mention this more so that you have something to search against because
there is some info on the SL lists about this also (using the "discount"
phrase)
Good luck
Ed W
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:44:49 +0000
From: Ed W <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] Clickable Part Numbers
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID: <..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Jeff Kowalczyk wrote:
IIRC, the misfeature of the current 1.2 UI is that if the user edits
the
part number for an instantiated line item,
I think the point of this is that different companies will use different
part numbers for the same item. The idea is that you can set these in
the item itself, but on an adhoc basis you can add an item to an invoice
and then overwrite both the description and the part number
On the other hand this is incredibly dangerous in practice because the
instinct for new users is to just correct the itemcode & description
(especially if the items are similar) and of course this deducts the
wrong inventory item, etc. Also very hard to spot after the event...
I think a useful solution would be that if the code is overwritten, to
display it as a fixed field with *our* code first and the overwritten
code as an editable box next to it. The final invoice/PO would still
only show the overwritten field though
Ed W
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:48:37 +0000
From: Ed W <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] On Hand correction
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID: <..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Nigel Titley wrote:
Folks,
Some how I've managed to get the inventory for one of my parts
incorrect. I suspect this was related to some invoice twiddling that I
did early on when I didn't really understand the system, but the
upshot
is that I have more in the system than I have on the shelf. How do I
go
about getting this right? I can think of two solutions:
1. I create a fictional "Inventory correction" customer and sell the
parts to him at zero cost
2. I delve into the database and fix the quantity directly in the
relevant table
Neither of these seems terribly elegant and the second one sounds
decidedly risky.
With SL at least this happens constantly...
I run a query to count all the items of a given part which are sold and
bought. The balance should be the items on hand (although this isn't
true if you use the shipping function for sales orders...). Given the
correct "on hand" amount I then adjust the database figure to show the
correct on-hand
In contrast though if I bought 10, sell 5, onhand=5, but my physical
stock check shows only 3 remaining then I must have lost 2 somewhere.
These need to be written off. I believe the correct technique is to use
a "written off" customer and sell for zero cost. This will cause the
P&L to take an immediate loss and the balance sheet will also be
adjusted.
Ed W
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 08:38:11 -0800
From: Chris Travers <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] Clickable Part Numbers
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID:
<..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:44 AM, Ed W <..hidden..> wrote:
Jeff Kowalczyk wrote:
IIRC, the misfeature of the current 1.2 UI is that if the user
edits the
part number for an instantiated line item,
I think the point of this is that different companies will use
different
part numbers for the same item. The idea is that you can set these in
the item itself, but on an adhoc basis you can add an item to an
invoice
and then overwrite both the description and the part number
It seems to me we need per-vendor part numbers AND separate associated
UPC codes when we revisit the inventory side.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:11:32 -0800
From: Chris Travers <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] On Hand correction
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID:
<..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Ed W <..hidden..> wrote:
Nigel Titley wrote:
Folks,
Some how I've managed to get the inventory for one of my parts
incorrect. I suspect this was related to some invoice twiddling
that I
did early on when I didn't really understand the system, but the
upshot
is that I have more in the system than I have on the shelf. How do
I go
about getting this right? I can think of two solutions:
1. I create a fictional "Inventory correction" customer and sell the
parts to him at zero cost
2. I delve into the database and fix the quantity directly in the
relevant table
Neither of these seems terribly elegant and the second one sounds
decidedly risky.
With SL at least this happens constantly...
I run a query to count all the items of a given part which are sold
and
bought. The balance should be the items on hand (although this isn't
true if you use the shipping function for sales orders...). Given the
correct "on hand" amount I then adjust the database figure to show the
correct on-hand
I have a query to do this easily too. One nice thing is you can get a
total as it should have existed at any point in time.
The only tricky part is when you are using assemblies to offer volume
discounts. Then you have to look at assemblies too. It gets more
complex if SOME assemblies are volume discounts, and others are not.
What I do in this case is flag volume discounts in the db so I know
which assemblies to look into.
In contrast though if I bought 10, sell 5, onhand=5, but my physical
stock check shows only 3 remaining then I must have lost 2 somewhere.
These need to be written off. I believe the correct technique is to
use
a "written off" customer and sell for zero cost. This will cause the
P&L to take an immediate loss and the balance sheet will also be
adjusted.
I run the query as part of the inventory count process too.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:13:09 -0800
From: Chris Travers <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] On Hand correction
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID:
<..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
My query of this sort has moved into the 1.3 module of
sql/modules/Inventory.sql, so you can see it in svn.
It requires extending the parts table slightly to run on 1.2.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 04:55:27 +0000
From: Stroller <..hidden..>
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-users] Clickable Part Numbers
To: ..hidden..
Message-ID:
<..hidden..>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On 17 Feb 2009, at 03:22, Jeff Kowalczyk wrote:
...
IIRC, the misfeature of the current 1.2 UI is that if the user edits
the
part number for an instantiated line item, it does not search for a
new
part in that lineitem slot. I think the user can even save the
document
with an arbitrarily altered partnumber, since the hidden parts.id is
used
for identity.
If I'm understanding your description correctly I have tended to do
this for some miscellaneous items.
I have a part number ZZ-ZZZ-ZZ that has a description of
"miscellaneous item" but I have changed that description before
posting the item.
I might use this, for example, if I purchase a fancy binder from
Staples to put customer documentation or a report in. All my parts are
for plumbing items or services, so a usual invoice might consist of
"12cm diameter pipe, 1m" x 6, "Labour, 1 hour" x 2.
I don't want to manage stock of a petty stationary item that I'll
never use again, or have a part number for it in my database; I do
want to bill the customer for the item but I want to add it to the
regular invoice & not have to create a separate AR > Add Transaction.
I suspect this usage is "wrong" and I think I have more recently just
left the description as "miscellaneous item" and added "binder" or
"stationary" or whatever in the item notes, but since the time I
started using SQL-Ledger the field was editable, so it "made sense" to
edit it.
Stroller.
------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San
Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the
Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source
participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source
code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
..hidden..
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users
End of Ledger-smb-users Digest, Vol 30, Issue 7
***********************************************