-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
stock articles #21
Comments
Da wir heute darüber gesprochen haben: Stimmt, wenn man die Lager-Bestellung nutzt um eine Lager-Entnahme selbst direkt einzutragen, braucht es keine Unterscheidung zwischen Eine Lager-Bestellung kann jedoch auch dem Usecase dienen, dass die Lagerartikel bestellt & in eine Kiste zum Abholen vorbereitet werden. Ich weiß nicht, ob es FoodCoops gibt, die das so handhaben, aber dafür wäre die Lager-Bestellung eigentlich passender. Dafür wäre die Unterscheidung schon wichtig (nur für |
Fixed by 67c0e38 |
Sorry, I think we do need I tried to create a stock article Rice which you should be able to "order" in 0.001 kg. I can't specify the group order unit though. I can't "deliver" a total amount of 24.5 kg as only full units are allowed, and after opening a stock order, I can only enter in full kg. I think An alternative could be to always allow stock articles with scalar units to be "ordered" in decimals (like 0.001 or even finer). |
I can see the use case for this, yes. But this isn't something that's supported upstream either, right? (There's no If so, I'd vote for moving this feature request to a separate issue for the Post merge milestone. What's still missing in the scope of this issue however (to mirror the upstream behavior), is the limitation that ordergroups may not "order" more than what's in stock. |
It isn't. However, I'd regard loose orders of stock articles as the no. 1 use case for any loose orders and it would be confusing for many users why this feature is omitted especially for stock articles (at first). I remember during the hackathon we agreed this should be included. And we would have the chance to test this in a public beta test. Note: Unit-unrelated notes: I don't see why |
Could be. However, I have to try and avoid implementing new features in this fork, sorry. (As discussed, this has already gotten out of hand 😅 ) So I'm leaving the issue open, but will be moving it to the Post-merge milestone (It includes things that will not be included in the initial PRs to upstream, but might still be included in the next foodsoft release by implementing them in separate PRs later on.) For now, I've implemented some bugfixes for stock articles and the whole stock logic should at least work as before. (I've simply removed the number input fields in the group article form, so we don't have issues with decimals.) |
Wenn die Logik passt, sollte sie auch für Lagerartikel übernommen werden.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: