gmane.comp.finance.ledger.smb.user

Re: Closing Purchase Orders when all items arereceived

Chris Travers — 2013-05-25T01:02:44

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service 
that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your
browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic
and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

Re: Closing Purchase Orders when all items arereceived

Zev Steen — 2013-05-24T17:22:45

Ah.  So I have to actually create an invoice for it.  Can't skip a step :)

Ok.  Thanks.

-Zev


On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Nigel Titley <nigel-tSwApmF4WfHQT0dZR+AlfA< at >public.gmane.org> wrote:

Re: Closing Purchase Orders when all items are received

Nigel Titley — 2013-05-24T17:16:03

The PO closes when you raise the invoice against it, and not before.

Nigel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service 
that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your
browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic
and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

Re: Closing Purchase Orders when all items arereceived

Zev Steen — 2013-05-24T15:42:25

Chris,

Thanks for the fast reply.

Let me correct something in my question and clarify our procedure.  I was
relying on my Receiving department for all the details on the issue.  I
just tested it myself if both databases to get clarity.  Here is the issue:

At the moment we use Ledger for inventory purposes only, not financial
bookkeeping.  When an item is purchased we write a Purchase Order for the
amount and cost of the item.  When it is received we use the Receive
Merchandise interface.  In the Receive Merchandise list only Purchase
Orders that have not been received in full appear.  Once we receive a
Purchase Order in full, it disappears from the Receive Merchandise list.

However, in both databases when we receive all the items in a PO from the
Receive Merchandise list, while it disappears from the Receive Merchandise
list it still appears on the Order Entry > Reports > Purchase Orders list
as an Open PO.

Unless I am misunderstanding something, the PO should close once all items
are received it full.

Re: Closing Purchase Orders when all items arereceived

Chris Travers — 2013-05-24T15:25:43


Can you describe in more detail how you are handling receiving?  In one are
you using the receiving interface, while in the other you are just putting
in the values in the PO screen and hitting vendor invoice?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service 
that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your
browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic
and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

Closing Purchase Orders when all items arereceived

Zev Steen — 2013-05-24T15:06:35

I have to Ledger databases running.  In one - when I fully receive all
items in a Purchase Order the PO closes itself.  In the other it does not
close itself.

Does anyone know why there is this difference? Is there any setting that
changes this?  I want the POs to close after all items are received.

Interestingly, in the database in which the POs don't close themselves,
once they are received in full they don't appear in the Shipping > Receive
list anymore.  But they do appear in the Order Entry > Reports > Purchase
Orders list when I tell it to show only Open Purchase orders.

Any ideas?

Thanks.

Re: voucher

Erik Huelsmann — 2013-05-19T12:43:29

Hi ario,

On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 7:51 AM, ario <ledger-smb-users-VTQ0GMTP6sTFYolcc7OVNg< at >public.gmane.org> wrote:


That's indeed the intended process. I'll document this in the book (
http://book.ledgersmb.org/).


Bye,


Erik.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

Re: voucher

ario — 2013-05-19T05:51:15

Or, is it by posting the invoice of the person with the advance payment
without putting anything in the 'Payment' section, and then, through
'Cash|Use Overpayment' paying (part of) the invoice?
And then additionally, if the advance payment didn't cover the whole
amount, processing an additional payment to the same invoice?
This sounds like the logical way to do it.

Thanks,
ario



On Sun, 2013-05-19 at 05:12 +0000, ario wrote:



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d

Re: voucher

ario — 2013-05-19T05:12:51

I'd be glad to :)


About 'reversal' of the advanced payments.
Is it ok to use the overpayment account in the Payment section of the AP
Transaction when said person actually has done (and billed) the work he
has been paid for in advance?
If not, what would be the procedure?

I've been looking in the 'Cash|Vouchers|Reverse Payment' screen, but
don't know how to relate that to the AP that I'd have to book when the
work will be done.

Or is it that simple that booking the payment in the AP on the date the
voucher has been issued, followed by 'undoing' the voucher through
'reverse payment' is what the developers have intended?

Thanks again,
Ario







------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free tr

Re: voucher

Erik Huelsmann — 2013-05-18T09:13:02

Hi ario,


On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 10:18 AM, ario <ledger-smb-users-VTQ0GMTP6sTFYolcc7OVNg< at >public.gmane.org>wrote:


Exactly.



Well, prepayments for services to be delivered (by you) are debts to the
customer, so should be recorded in Liability accounts. However, if you pay
someone for services they will deliver to you some day, that's an asset.

This leads to the conclusion that an AR prepayment account should be
configured as a liability and an AP prepayment account should be configured
as an asset.



Well, that depends. If I understand correctly, you paid someone to deliver
work to you on a future date. Then, that's an overpayment in the payables
side, so you would configure an asset account with the "Overpayment" flag
on the Payables line.



There's no need for that: the system will track separate balances per
counterparty -- using the single account you'll configure.


No problem. If you have any more questions, don't hesitate to ask!


Bye,


Erik.
--------------------------------------------------

Re: defaulting to pdf

Erik Huelsmann — 2013-05-18T09:00:06

Hi Bob,


On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Bob Miller <bob-bdq14YP6qtSQda5rJngorg< at >public.gmane.org> wrote:


Thanks for your feedback! I've filed an enhancement request:
https://sourceforge.net/p/ledger-smb/feature-requests/276/

Bye,

Erik.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

voucher

ario — 2013-05-18T08:18:18

I tried to enter a prepayment done to somebody for future work, but get
a 'no overpayment account specified' error in 'Cash|Payment'.

Ok, INAA, but I take it an account in the CoA is required with the
'Overpayment' flag set.

Should this be a newly created assett account for this purpose
(prepayments) only, to check later for zero balance?

Then, in this specific case, should the 'Overpayment' flag be set on the
'Payables', or on the 'Receivables' line in the 'Edit Account' screen?

I think a separate account per person or group would be appropriate, no?


Thanks for your time



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d

Re: payments processing fails in 1.3.29

ario — 2013-05-18T01:05:44

Ok, I see the problem, it's a combination of lay-out and intuitivity in
the Payments/Receipts forms.


Executive Summary of suggestions:
1. change 'To Pay' into 'Payment'.
2. move payment checkbox in dropdown menu to line with 'To Pay' amount.
3. present a subtotal field after 'Update' for all payments going to be
effectuated if 'Post' were to be hit.
Maybe this could make the process a bit more intuitive?


Explanation:

1.
It was easy for me to confuse 'Amount Due' with 'To Pay', because they
can mean the same, but the program means with 'To Pay': "I am going to
pay this", while I thought it was the amount to be paid.

2.
Further the location of the checkbox on the line 'source' in the
dropdown of an invoice line. If it means to confirm 'paying now', it
would be more logically, I think, if it were on the same line as the 'To
Pay' data field.

3.
Further, after 'Update', one might expect a field with a subtotal
listing the total of payments actually going to be done.
I could not find that, I only can see th

defaulting to pdf

Bob Miller — 2013-05-17T17:16:33

Hello,

This is just a comment, no need for action.

When I first installed the new version of ledger I had to mess with some
code in io.pl (and I think rp.pl?) to make it so that PDF was the
default setting when emailing invoices and statements.  Sloppy though
they were, when I upgraded recently those changes I made got written
over.  On thinking about it, that isn't really unexpected behaviour, but
it sure would be useful if there was a better way to set those defaults.
Maybe a feature plan for 1.5 or something?

Thanks for reading...

Re: payments processing fails in 1.3.29

ario — 2013-05-17T15:42:39

No, that was the checkbox indeed, apparently I had missed something,
good I didn't click 'Post' :);

So, next I guessed I should open the dropdown arrow on the invoice's
line and input the paid/received amount in the <field> following
'Source|Cash(dropdown)|<field>' and check the checkbox immediately after
that field and proceed with 'Update'?
But if I do that, there is no reflection of the amount in the top part
of the screen, which I would expect analogue to the previous version I
have used (1.2.21), so there's no way for me to check the result of
'Update'.
Is it intentional that there is no summary/accrued amount shown after
filling out payment/receipt fields for various invoices at the same
time, and hitting 'Update'?

Or am I still following the wrong procedure, or is it a bug.
If the latter, should I just hit 'Update' and then 'Post'?

As just removal of the line won't occur as frequently, I think, as
proper processing of the payment/receipt, I'd suggest putting the
'remove' checkbox in the dropdown me

Re: payments processing fails in 1.3.29

Chris Travers — 2013-05-17T14:38:14


If it is the checkbox under the X that is to remove the invoice from the
list.  Don't click the checkbox for invoices you want to pay.  We may want
to rethink what we can do to make it more obvious what it does.

Is it a different checkbox?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

payments processing fails in 1.3.29

ario — 2013-05-17T14:12:56

Hello, I didn't find this problem in the list of fixed bugs for 1.3.32,
so I'm afraid it's me that is doing something wrong or what.

I try to process a payment by going to Cash|Receipt/Payment|<Customer
Name>|Continue.
Then on any invoice line I check the check-box at the right of the
invoice for which I just received/did a payment, and press 'Update'.
What happens then is that the invoice being 'updated' has disappeared
from the screen, so posting doesn't seem an option anymore either.
I'm also a bit weary about hitting 'Post' without 'Update' first.

Did I miss something?




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d

Re: sequence settings numbering problem

Chris Travers — 2013-05-14T15:14:44

Hi;

I put together a patch for this, for inclusion in 1.3.33 (after 1.3.32
ships, I will commit it).  Feel free to try it.  It works for me.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Giovanni Biscuolo <g+ledgersmb-NT1BxUkkQJ+HXe+LvDLADg< at >public.gmane.org>wrote:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-users mailing list
Ledger-smb-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f< at >public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users

sequence settings numbering problem

Giovanni Biscuolo — 2013-05-14T09:54:14

hi all,

I'm using LedgerSMB v. 1.3.25 (Debian package "ledgersmb 1.3.25-1: all"
currently in jessie - testing - repo) and I'm facing a problem with special
values in sequence settings (System | Defaults menu)

if I set the value of any "Number" (e.g. Sales Order Number) in System|Defaults to 

  <?lsmb YYMMDD ?> 0001

when I post that document (e.g. Sales Order) I get a sequence like this:

  <?lsmb YYMMDD ?> 0002 

it seems the placeholder for YYMMDD is not replaced with the date, the
special template code does not work (sequence numbering works well)

the sequence numbering special values are documented in user manual section
6.5.1, and YYMMDD is one of those; I've tested with date also but it doesn't
work too

any hint to fix this please?
in Italy we should issue invoices with a unique numbering starting from 1
every year and we must include the year in invoice numbering

thanks in advance
Giovanni

Re: scheduling

Chris Travers — 2013-05-14T08:15:31

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Pongrácz István <pongracz.istvan< at >gmail.com



Just to respond as to the direction we are going (not sure on timeline)....

The SQL-Ledger way was to essentially copy a transaction to a new date and
reference.  This requires that the transaction be there, and be posted.

This has two major problems.  The first is that modifying schedules is a
pain, and the second is that you cannot modify the scheduled transaction.
 For example if costs vary this is a problem.  So to address this in 1.3 we
have a template transaction add-on which is used by at least one customer
in production.  However these cannot be scheduled.  Template transactions
are not on the books and they can be altered at any time.

What we'd really like to do is attach the schedule to templates instead of
transactions.  However this work is unlikely to be done before 1.4 unless
we get significant help at this point.  Such an effort would allow,
however, transactions to be scheduled, and for changes in the schedul

Re: scheduling

Pongrácz István — 2013-05-14T07:55:20

 
Regarding the scheduling, I also reported this kind of feature: it must be posted to get scheduled.

From my point of view, it would be useful to get an ID for a specific scheduled transaction, which identifies the scheduled transaction itself.
Identical ids, like invoice numbers can be generated when the new scheduled transaction posted.

What for? It could happen if a customer modify his subscribe or want to cancel it. For reference everybody can use the ID of the schedule (like an order in normal case) to search and modify/cancel the schedule.
Or not cancel, but add 12 more months subscription.

Bye,
István


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_