IRC logs of #tryton for Friday, 2008-12-19 #tryton log beginning Fri Dec 19 00:00:01 CET 2008
2008-12-19 00:04 <CIA-53> tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 408:358e26f98e1d stock/ Use better identation for complex sql
2008-12-19 00:37 -!- tekknokrat( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 02:12 <CIA-53> tryton: * r389 /wiki/ Edited wiki page through web user interface.
2008-12-19 02:12 <CIA-53> tryton: * r390 /wiki/ Edited wiki page through web user interface.
2008-12-19 02:12 <CIA-53> tryton: * r391 /wiki/ Edited wiki page through web user interface.
2008-12-19 02:22 <vengfulsquirrel> X0d_of_N0d: Yeah sorry that should be more clear, it was my understanding that a bom would be flat.. and then you'd look of each part's bom... and that tree of boms make the multi-level bom. So initially there would just exist single level boms and then at the "explosion" phase they would be assembled into a tree like structure.
2008-12-19 02:23 <vengfulsquirrel> Does that sound more correct to you ?
2008-12-19 02:25 -!- carlos(n=carlos@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 02:37 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: hum...
2008-12-19 02:38 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: well, boms are used for several things, and depending on their use they need to be viewed in different ways
2008-12-19 02:39 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: but the actual structure is a tree...
2008-12-19 02:39 <mmarshall> vengfulsquirrel: s/bom/bomb/g and what you said sounds pretty funny ;)
2008-12-19 02:39 <X0d_of_N0d> hehe
2008-12-19 02:40 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: there was some joking early on in our project that we hoped homeland security wasn't monitoring our phone because of the number of times we said bom
2008-12-19 02:40 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: and active bom
2008-12-19 02:41 <vengfulsquirrel> ha yeah exploding boms all over your workplace is dangerous
2008-12-19 02:42 <vengfulsquirrel> The stuff I read usual refers the breaking down of a product and the parts needed as "exploding".
2008-12-19 02:42 <X0d_of_N0d> yeah, so basically a bom is a list of components that make up an item.
2008-12-19 02:42 <vengfulsquirrel> Correct.
2008-12-19 02:43 <X0d_of_N0d> yeah, that makes sense...
2008-12-19 02:43 <mmarshall>
2008-12-19 02:43 <vengfulsquirrel> Well because then each part has its own bom.. which is another list of components.
2008-12-19 02:43 <X0d_of_N0d> but ultimately it's a tree, and everything else is based on that idea
2008-12-19 02:44 <X0d_of_N0d> each part can be a single item, or a list of items...
2008-12-19 02:44 <X0d_of_N0d> in terp they made it so each bom was made up of other boms, and each manufactured part, or part used in manufacturing, matched to an item
2008-12-19 02:44 <X0d_of_N0d> which might be the right way to do it....but that creates some extra data and stuff
2008-12-19 02:44 <X0d_of_N0d> like if you buy something already built you don't need a bom for it
2008-12-19 02:45 <X0d_of_N0d> but terp makes you enter a bom for it
2008-12-19 02:45 <vengfulsquirrel> hmm
2008-12-19 02:47 <X0d_of_N0d> that doesn't make it wrong... but it could possibly be done a different way I think
2008-12-19 02:48 <X0d_of_N0d> but perhaps it's eaiser to do that way
2008-12-19 02:48 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah i'm pretty new to all this but why would you want boms to be made of other boms.. do you mean implementation wise or literally you type bom ids into a given bom ?
2008-12-19 02:49 <X0d_of_N0d> I mean that the structure of a bom is such that it needs to be recursive
2008-12-19 02:49 <X0d_of_N0d> an assembly is made of a set of subassemblies, and that can be made of a set of subassemblies,
2008-12-19 02:49 <vengfulsquirrel> Yes I understand that but the system should do that behind the scenes so to speak.
2008-12-19 02:49 <X0d_of_N0d> infinitely
2008-12-19 02:50 <X0d_of_N0d> right
2008-12-19 02:51 <vengfulsquirrel> What defines a workcenter ?
2008-12-19 02:52 <X0d_of_N0d> brb....
2008-12-19 03:00 <X0d_of_N0d> boss called
2008-12-19 03:00 <X0d_of_N0d> so maybe products should be added to boms instead of other boms, then tryton figures out bom structure by checking if products have boms attached
2008-12-19 03:00 <X0d_of_N0d> anyway...
2008-12-19 03:01 <X0d_of_N0d> so a workcenter is just a place where something is assembled
2008-12-19 03:01 <X0d_of_N0d> this could be a workbench, or a machine
2008-12-19 03:01 <X0d_of_N0d> assembled/created/refined/etc
2008-12-19 03:02 <X0d_of_N0d> so one of our workcenters would be an automated milling station where we bring in raw aluminium or steel, then mill it into a desired shape
2008-12-19 03:02 <X0d_of_N0d> but since we have 5 or 6 stations that could do the same thing, we don't care which one the part runs on...
2008-12-19 03:03 <X0d_of_N0d> oh... one other thing that terp doesn't seem to have...
2008-12-19 03:03 <X0d_of_N0d> so a route is a path through each of the machines that defines each step in the manufacturing process
2008-12-19 03:03 <vengfulsquirrel> Hmm but multiple pieces of equipment could be assigned to a workcenter, is that correct?
2008-12-19 03:04 <X0d_of_N0d> at each step in the route it's possible for different materials to be included from the bom...
2008-12-19 03:04 <X0d_of_N0d> well.... usually a workcenter is a place where things are made, so it is the collection of equiptment
2008-12-19 03:05 <X0d_of_N0d> like for a computer manufacturing company, like the terp example...
2008-12-19 03:05 <X0d_of_N0d> it would be a screwdriver, a static mat, and a person
2008-12-19 03:05 <X0d_of_N0d> and maybe some other materials
2008-12-19 03:06 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah I was thinking people, equipment and resources(subassemblies, raw materials) would need to allocated.
2008-12-19 03:06 <vengfulsquirrel> Those would be the three main elements.
2008-12-19 03:07 <X0d_of_N0d> if you have automated machines you don't need people, but I think you're right as long as you take that into account
2008-12-19 03:07 <X0d_of_N0d> but the same materials would not always be allocted to the same workcenter
2008-12-19 03:08 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah it depends on the Work Effort
2008-12-19 03:08 <vengfulsquirrel> i'm using the terminology from this book
2008-12-19 03:08 <X0d_of_N0d> a different person could man the same machine depending on the job, or a different set of materials could come in and two things could be produced at the workcenter
2008-12-19 03:08 <vengfulsquirrel> whatever you are making currently at that work center
2008-12-19 03:08 <vengfulsquirrel> Sorry we could use job that sounds a lot more realistic.
2008-12-19 03:08 <X0d_of_N0d> generally, yes
2008-12-19 03:09 <X0d_of_N0d> you want a real world example from our company?
2008-12-19 03:10 <X0d_of_N0d> We manufacture a sort of robotics
2008-12-19 03:11 <vengfulsquirrel> Yes, but most likely all this will be pretty far in the future implementation-wise but its good to be driving towards something specific.
2008-12-19 03:11 <vengfulsquirrel> Just as a disclaimer.
2008-12-19 03:11 <X0d_of_N0d> and we have several different types of workcenters
2008-12-19 03:12 <X0d_of_N0d> well, if the tinyerp thing doesn't work for us then I'm going to need to make this work fast...
2008-12-19 03:12 <vengfulsquirrel> ha
2008-12-19 03:12 <vengfulsquirrel> like how fast?
2008-12-19 03:12 <X0d_of_N0d> With a good basis, and broken down into components, I don't think it's too complex
2008-12-19 03:13 <vengfulsquirrel> Well the algorithms are going to be the hard part.
2008-12-19 03:13 <X0d_of_N0d> like my predicessor was supposed to do it 6 months ago
2008-12-19 03:13 <X0d_of_N0d> not really.....
2008-12-19 03:14 <X0d_of_N0d> a basic algorithm is easy, a good one is harder
2008-12-19 03:14 <X0d_of_N0d> but something can be implimented quickly, then refined into somethig good
2008-12-19 03:14 <X0d_of_N0d> The really important thing is the data structure.
2008-12-19 03:14 <vengfulsquirrel> I think the opposite but we'll find out soon.
2008-12-19 03:15 <X0d_of_N0d> With a good data structure it will be easy to build a smart algrithm
2008-12-19 03:16 <X0d_of_N0d> unfortunately all the systems I've really worked on sucked...
2008-12-19 03:16 <vengfulsquirrel> Well its hard to be everything to everyone.
2008-12-19 03:16 <vengfulsquirrel> Anyways so we have jobs, workcenters, equipment, people and parts(raw or subassembly).
2008-12-19 03:17 <X0d_of_N0d> and routes, which are paths that the part takes through the manufacturing process
2008-12-19 03:18 <X0d_of_N0d> boms can be used for mrp shop planning (figuring out how to schedule everything in the best way)
2008-12-19 03:18 <X0d_of_N0d> but they can also be used for accounting (figuring out the total cost of an assembly)
2008-12-19 03:19 <X0d_of_N0d> I hope I'm not overloading you, I'm basically just giving you as much info as I can based on what I've been working with for that last few months
2008-12-19 03:19 <vengfulsquirrel> hmm i'd think you'd probably want routes between jobs right ?
2008-12-19 03:20 <X0d_of_N0d> each stop in the route is a job
2008-12-19 03:20 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah hmm and a job spans workcenters correct?
2008-12-19 03:20 <X0d_of_N0d> a route is really just a list of jobs
2008-12-19 03:20 <X0d_of_N0d> jobs are placed on workcenters
2008-12-19 03:20 <X0d_of_N0d> they must be done on a single workcenter, or set of workcenters...
2008-12-19 03:21 <X0d_of_N0d> but it's important to sometimes be able to choose a workcenter to put them on from a list
2008-12-19 03:21 <vengfulsquirrel> hmm
2008-12-19 03:21 <X0d_of_N0d> so....
2008-12-19 03:21 <vengfulsquirrel> but its one to one then
2008-12-19 03:21 <vengfulsquirrel> or a set of workcenters could satisfy this job but we have to pick one
2008-12-19 03:22 <X0d_of_N0d> it could be either....but if the list of workcenters that could satify the job a lenght of one, then it's the same thing
2008-12-19 03:23 <X0d_of_N0d> so we could make a part on a list of 5 machines, but maybe another part can only be made on one machine
2008-12-19 03:23 <vengfulsquirrel> oh no i mean could you have a job that involves two workcenters simultaneously
2008-12-19 03:23 <X0d_of_N0d> no
2008-12-19 03:23 <X0d_of_N0d> that would be two jobs
2008-12-19 03:23 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah okay so the 5 machines are disjoint from that single machine ?
2008-12-19 03:24 <vengfulsquirrel> That will be a concern when trying to allocate work.
2008-12-19 03:24 <X0d_of_N0d> right
2008-12-19 03:24 <X0d_of_N0d> so say we have an assembly of two parts...
2008-12-19 03:25 <X0d_of_N0d> the first part can be made on any of those machines, the second part can only be made on one different machine
2008-12-19 03:25 <X0d_of_N0d> those two parts can (and should) be made at the same time
2008-12-19 03:25 <X0d_of_N0d> so they have different routes
2008-12-19 03:26 <X0d_of_N0d> hum...
2008-12-19 03:26 <X0d_of_N0d> that's the trick
2008-12-19 03:27 <X0d_of_N0d> so the way things are in tinyerp I don't know if you could really do that
2008-12-19 03:27 <vengfulsquirrel> I think workcenters are going to be a problem
2008-12-19 03:27 <X0d_of_N0d> how so?
2008-12-19 03:28 <X0d_of_N0d> workcenters are easy, routes could be a trick...but I'm not even sure that's an issue... scheduling is difficult
2008-12-19 03:28 <vengfulsquirrel> or not a problem I guess I don't understand why they exist
2008-12-19 03:28 <X0d_of_N0d> why a workcenter exists?
2008-12-19 03:29 <vengfulsquirrel> I think a job should merely be assigned machines, people and parts.. and should make parts. And routes are a list of jobs.
2008-12-19 03:29 <X0d_of_N0d> ok...
2008-12-19 03:29 <X0d_of_N0d> so the machine has to be put into the system so that it's not assigned twice
2008-12-19 03:30 <vengfulsquirrel> And I'm going to say a job must belong to only a single Facility and a route could span two facilities which would require physical transport.
2008-12-19 03:30 <X0d_of_N0d> and that machine is essentially a workcenter that the job takes place at
2008-12-19 03:30 <X0d_of_N0d> I think you're just seeing things from a different perspective, and I like the direction that's going
2008-12-19 03:30 <X0d_of_N0d> ehhhhhh
2008-12-19 03:31 <X0d_of_N0d> lets stop right there
2008-12-19 03:31 <X0d_of_N0d> Lets say we need a part to get painted, and we don't do it on site
2008-12-19 03:31 <X0d_of_N0d> and we have two places we could send that part to get painted....
2008-12-19 03:32 <X0d_of_N0d> so there are two different places that part could get painted, two different sites
2008-12-19 03:32 <vengfulsquirrel> facilities
2008-12-19 03:32 <X0d_of_N0d> right
2008-12-19 03:32 <vengfulsquirrel> This would be part of your business right? Not subcontractors.
2008-12-19 03:32 <X0d_of_N0d> so here's the thing....
2008-12-19 03:33 <X0d_of_N0d> these would be subcontractors, but it could be part of someone's biz
2008-12-19 03:33 <X0d_of_N0d> maybe a company has two assembly facilites and they don't know which one to send a part to
2008-12-19 03:34 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah but that's the routing
2008-12-19 03:34 <vengfulsquirrel> The job is to paint the part
2008-12-19 03:35 <X0d_of_N0d> but those two facitlies could have equal value in the route
2008-12-19 03:35 <X0d_of_N0d> the job could take place at either one
2008-12-19 03:35 <vengfulsquirrel> then just pick one
2008-12-19 03:35 <vengfulsquirrel> now its allocated
2008-12-19 03:35 <X0d_of_N0d> the computer does that
2008-12-19 03:35 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah
2008-12-19 03:36 <X0d_of_N0d> so the thing is that the thigns we're talking about are essentially part of the planning process...
2008-12-19 03:36 <vengfulsquirrel> hmm i guess workcenters might be necessary within the same facility to route between... say so you don't make a part in the farthest corner and then have to carry it across the whole facility to the other corner
2008-12-19 03:36 <X0d_of_N0d> work orders are the realization of that planning
2008-12-19 03:37 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: that's less important than paying attention to the capacity of the workcenter so you don't overload it
2008-12-19 03:38 <vengfulsquirrel> hmm yeah maybe we could leave that up to the user then
2008-12-19 03:38 <vengfulsquirrel> or at least at first it wouldn't matter
2008-12-19 03:38 <X0d_of_N0d> well that's where a work order comes in
2008-12-19 03:39 <vengfulsquirrel> What is a work order ?
2008-12-19 03:39 <X0d_of_N0d> you should be able to set a preference or weight on the workcenter per job maybe
2008-12-19 03:39 <X0d_of_N0d> a work order tells people to actually DO something
2008-12-19 03:39 <vengfulsquirrel> We need 10 widgets by Thursday?
2008-12-19 03:40 <X0d_of_N0d> there are planned work orders and scheduled work orders
2008-12-19 03:40 <X0d_of_N0d> brb
2008-12-19 03:41 <X0d_of_N0d> yes, that's exactly it...we need 10 widgets, they'll be made on machine X (potentially by user Y)
2008-12-19 03:43 <X0d_of_N0d> the computer would produce a scheduled work order that says that, then the user would decied if they wanted to accept that work order, or change it
2008-12-19 03:44 <X0d_of_N0d> e.g.: I machine Z is operating much more quickly today, lets move the job from machine X to machine Z
2008-12-19 03:44 <vengfulsquirrel> wow yeah that's going to be rough
2008-12-19 03:44 <X0d_of_N0d> then once it's actually scheduled, the scheduler takes that into account and doesn't try to schedule a job at the same time as the already scheduled job
2008-12-19 03:45 <vengfulsquirrel> because once the system has allocated everything you have to reallocate everything when you make a change to its decisions
2008-12-19 03:45 <X0d_of_N0d> it sounds more complex than it is
2008-12-19 03:45 <X0d_of_N0d> doing it right will be tough, doing it won't be that bad
2008-12-19 03:45 <X0d_of_N0d> making it good enough to be better than terp isn't going to be too complex
2008-12-19 03:46 <X0d_of_N0d> the system doesn't actually allocate anything until you make a decision.
2008-12-19 03:46 <X0d_of_N0d> but if you change your mind after you've allocated, yeah, it'll have to reallocate
2008-12-19 03:47 <X0d_of_N0d> and that's where virutal stock and real stock come in....
2008-12-19 03:49 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah so the schedule would be decided to happen over a certain period of time right ?
2008-12-19 03:49 <vengfulsquirrel> Or is it day by day ?
2008-12-19 03:49 <X0d_of_N0d> I want you to keep in mind what you said earlier about having jobs and then allocating resources to those jobs...
2008-12-19 03:49 <vengfulsquirrel> I guess it can't be otherwise you can't really plan for anything
2008-12-19 03:49 <X0d_of_N0d> yeah
2008-12-19 03:49 <X0d_of_N0d> it depends
2008-12-19 03:50 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah it depends on lead times I guess.
2008-12-19 03:50 <X0d_of_N0d> when there's a lot of demand you'd probably want to schedule that demand on a daily basis so you don't get behind
2008-12-19 03:51 <X0d_of_N0d> or you could always be trying to rescheduling so you get a more efficient schedule
2008-12-19 03:51 <X0d_of_N0d> with less downtime
2008-12-19 03:51 <X0d_of_N0d>
2008-12-19 03:51 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah which is NP-hard
2008-12-19 03:52 <X0d_of_N0d> since jobs can be scheduled in different ways, in order to find the most efficient way to schedule there are a few ways to do it.....
2008-12-19 03:52 <X0d_of_N0d> but there's no right way
2008-12-19 03:52 <X0d_of_N0d> ....but that's all a long term problem
2008-12-19 03:52 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah I think just scheduling "something" will be the second step.
2008-12-19 03:52 <X0d_of_N0d> it doesn't have to be done perfectly to be better than nothing...
2008-12-19 03:52 <vengfulsquirrel> The first step won't even involved scheduling.
2008-12-19 03:53 <X0d_of_N0d> and terp doesn't even have a concept of capacity (afaik)
2008-12-19 03:53 <X0d_of_N0d> right
2008-12-19 03:53 <X0d_of_N0d> yes
2008-12-19 03:53 <vengfulsquirrel> If we provide the user a way to customize it that ... that would be enough for a long time I guess.
2008-12-19 03:53 <vengfulsquirrel> *customize that
2008-12-19 03:54 <X0d_of_N0d> don't worry about scheduling at all right now
2008-12-19 03:54 <X0d_of_N0d> or rather automated scheduilng
2008-12-19 03:54 <X0d_of_N0d> first make a system where you can manually schedule, then you can see the schedule so you don't accidently overschedule a workcenter
2008-12-19 03:55 <X0d_of_N0d> (or machine, or whatever) or overallocate a resource
2008-12-19 03:55 <vengfulsquirrel> you mean do capacity checks on manual scheduling first?
2008-12-19 03:55 <X0d_of_N0d> yes
2008-12-19 03:55 <X0d_of_N0d> which tinyerp might have
2008-12-19 03:57 <X0d_of_N0d> I think in the planning process, focusing on the job is a good idea
2008-12-19 03:57 <X0d_of_N0d> then in the actual allocation of resources, the focus should be the workcenter...
2008-12-19 03:58 <X0d_of_N0d> e.g.: this job *can* be done at workcetner a, b, or c...
2008-12-19 03:58 <X0d_of_N0d> workcenter a is doing the job
2008-12-19 03:58 <X0d_of_N0d> you see what I'm saying?
2008-12-19 03:58 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah the problem i have with workcenter is its not really a location at all
2008-12-19 03:58 <vengfulsquirrel> it could be 2 machines
2008-12-19 03:59 <vengfulsquirrel> or it could be 8 machines
2008-12-19 03:59 <X0d_of_N0d> no
2008-12-19 03:59 <vengfulsquirrel> what if a workcenter is two machines but a job only needs one of those machines ?
2008-12-19 03:59 <X0d_of_N0d> it could be one machine only
2008-12-19 03:59 <X0d_of_N0d> one workcenter is one place
2008-12-19 03:59 <X0d_of_N0d> one machine, one table, etc
2008-12-19 04:00 <X0d_of_N0d> that's two workcenters, and the job can take place on either
2008-12-19 04:00 <vengfulsquirrel> hmm
2008-12-19 04:00 <X0d_of_N0d> so this is what I was thinking.....
2008-12-19 04:00 <vengfulsquirrel> so equipment is assigned to workcenters and workcenters are assigned to jobs
2008-12-19 04:00 <vengfulsquirrel> equipment is NOT assigned to jobs
2008-12-19 04:01 <X0d_of_N0d> a workcenter is one thing, a job can be done on a work resource (or workcenter group, or whatever) which is made up of multiple workcenter
2008-12-19 04:01 <X0d_of_N0d> no...
2008-12-19 04:01 <X0d_of_N0d> jobs are assigned to workcenters
2008-12-19 04:01 <X0d_of_N0d> well....
2008-12-19 04:01 <X0d_of_N0d> ok... actual jobs are assigned to workcenters, but in planning possible workcenters could be a property of jobs
2008-12-19 04:02 <X0d_of_N0d> a job could be done at several workcenters
2008-12-19 04:02 <X0d_of_N0d> ACTION is brainstorming at this point, not telling you the right way to do things...
2008-12-19 04:02 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah well so am I but maybe brain fizzling at times
2008-12-19 04:02 <X0d_of_N0d> a job could be done at severl possible workcenters
2008-12-19 04:03 <X0d_of_N0d> an acutal job is assigned to a single workcenter
2008-12-19 04:03 <X0d_of_N0d> The thing is, I think, that you're trying to think about two seperate issues as a single idea
2008-12-19 04:04 <X0d_of_N0d> It would probably be best to use pictures....
2008-12-19 04:05 <X0d_of_N0d> Perhaps I'll try to draw this out for you tomorrow to make it easier to explain
2008-12-19 04:05 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah I can whip something up in DIA
2008-12-19 04:06 <X0d_of_N0d> yes?
2008-12-19 04:06 <vengfulsquirrel> its a diagram editor
2008-12-19 04:06 <vengfulsquirrel> Oh yeah if you want to make a diagram that's great too
2008-12-19 04:06 <X0d_of_N0d> my email address is josh dot dukes at microvu dot com
2008-12-19 04:06 <X0d_of_N0d> I've used dia, it's pretty cool
2008-12-19 04:07 <X0d_of_N0d> email me what you think, I'll play with it and send it back
2008-12-19 04:07 <X0d_of_N0d> this will be really useful for documentation later on aswell
2008-12-19 04:12 <X0d_of_N0d> I'll catch you on this tomorrow though....
2008-12-19 04:12 <X0d_of_N0d> what time is it there??
2008-12-19 04:12 <vengfulsquirrel> 7:15 PM
2008-12-19 04:12 <vengfulsquirrel> In California, USA
2008-12-19 04:13 <X0d_of_N0d> vengfulsquirrel: no kidding
2008-12-19 04:13 <X0d_of_N0d> where at
2008-12-19 04:13 <vengfulsquirrel> San Francisco
2008-12-19 04:13 <X0d_of_N0d> ?
2008-12-19 04:13 <vengfulsquirrel> if that's what you mean
2008-12-19 04:13 <X0d_of_N0d> I'm in santa rosa
2008-12-19 04:13 <X0d_of_N0d> where do you work?
2008-12-19 04:13 <vengfulsquirrel> nice, yeah well maybe we could even hand the pictures to each other
2008-12-19 04:14 <X0d_of_N0d> hell yeah man, I'm down for a trip to the bay
2008-12-19 04:14 <X0d_of_N0d> you work for a consulting company or something?
2008-12-19 04:14 <X0d_of_N0d> or you self employed?
2008-12-19 04:14 <X0d_of_N0d> or just doing this for fun?
2008-12-19 04:14 <vengfulsquirrel> I work for my family's nursery
2008-12-19 04:15 <vengfulsquirrel>
2008-12-19 04:15 <vengfulsquirrel> Eventually I'd like to integrate what we have with tryton and clean up a bunch of our process.
2008-12-19 04:16 <X0d_of_N0d> yeah, you're not going to need anywhere near the complexity of our mrp I don't think.... but it seems like some of that stuff would be useful
2008-12-19 04:16 <vengfulsquirrel> And then stop working there
2008-12-19 04:16 <vengfulsquirrel> ha
2008-12-19 04:16 <X0d_of_N0d> so is there any kind of manufacturing that you do?
2008-12-19 04:16 <X0d_of_N0d> lol
2008-12-19 04:16 <vengfulsquirrel> No just the planning would be useful
2008-12-19 04:17 <X0d_of_N0d> yeah, I really like working on tryton... it would be nice to be able to make money just doing this without having to deal with the extra crap I have to do
2008-12-19 04:17 <vengfulsquirrel> seeds to seedlings to one gallon plants... is like at least 6 months and if you need the gallons and you don't have seedlings you are f'ed
2008-12-19 04:18 <X0d_of_N0d> so your route is really simple
2008-12-19 04:18 <X0d_of_N0d> so do you keep them seperated?
2008-12-19 04:18 <vengfulsquirrel> well my real problem isn't that right now
2008-12-19 04:19 <X0d_of_N0d> what is it?
2008-12-19 04:20 <vengfulsquirrel> umm well a one gallon plant has three stages: not rooted, partially rooted and fully rooted.... I can only ship fully rooted but can sell partially or fully at a physical store
2008-12-19 04:21 <vengfulsquirrel> so I have like this weird stock count to store inventory conversion
2008-12-19 04:22 <X0d_of_N0d> that's really an interesting problem
2008-12-19 04:22 <X0d_of_N0d> Look, I need to get home but I want to look at this and help you out with your problem. Knowing what you need would be helpful in figuring out a more general structure that would be useful for everyone...
2008-12-19 04:23 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah that's fine sounds good, hopefully we can get some other business examples as well
2008-12-19 04:23 <vengfulsquirrel> More rounded-ness will help everyone
2008-12-19 04:23 <vengfulsquirrel> *if we design it right
2008-12-19 04:23 <vengfulsquirrel> I'm going to think about this workcenter some more and maybe start some pictures.
2008-12-19 04:24 <X0d_of_N0d> so is the "get seeds, plant seeds, wait" pretty much your whole workflow?
2008-12-19 04:25 <X0d_of_N0d> is there a place you plant them? is there a place you move them to? how does it work now?
2008-12-19 04:27 <X0d_of_N0d> well...yeah.. I gotta go... but would you be wiling to email some of this info and anything else you can tell me. I can look at that in the morning and try to develop a more complete idea of how to aproach this so that you don't do more work than you need to, but I still get what I need out of this.
2008-12-19 04:27 <X0d_of_N0d> that sound cool?
2008-12-19 04:28 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah that sounds good
2008-12-19 04:28 <vengfulsquirrel> i'm not sure how much i'll have by the morning but i'll send it asap
2008-12-19 04:28 <X0d_of_N0d> you catch my addy earlier?
2008-12-19 04:28 <vengfulsquirrel> yeah
2008-12-19 04:28 <vengfulsquirrel> got it
2008-12-19 04:28 <X0d_of_N0d> dude, no worries
2008-12-19 04:29 <X0d_of_N0d> cool
2008-12-19 04:29 <X0d_of_N0d> catch you later man
2008-12-19 04:29 <vengfulsquirrel> later
2008-12-19 05:20 -!- yangoon( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 07:00 -!- udono( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 07:49 <vengfulsquirrel> Does menu sequence have to be exact ?
2008-12-19 07:58 -!- sharkcz( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 08:12 <Timitos> vengfulsquirrel: i think no. it only defines priority of the menu entries. but i am not quite sure.
2008-12-19 08:16 -!- marmu( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 08:40 <CIA-53> tryton: Timitos roundup * #690/account_statement: invoice creation in editable list view should be prohibited: [new] the changes to the account_statement module are great. the only thing i found is that it should not be possible to create an invoice from a ...
2008-12-19 08:56 <vengfulsquirrel> Timitos: Okay yeah I guess I'll just try it and see.
2008-12-19 08:59 <udono> vengfulsquirrel: the sequence is just used for sorting the menu entries on the same level in the right /sequnce/.
2008-12-19 09:33 <vengfulsquirrel> Thanks, I don't understand this, what should go in the groups attribute on a menu item ? '''groups: A list of xml id of group, that have access to the menu, separated by commas.'''
2008-12-19 09:38 <Timitos> vengfulsquirrel: look at this. in the first lines i think you will find your answer. if not ask again:
2008-12-19 09:39 <Timitos> you can define security groups. and then you can define which groups is allowed to access a menuitem
2008-12-19 09:46 -!- Gedd( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 09:57 -!- cedk(n=ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 09:58 <vengfulsquirrel> Timitos: Yeah now that you point it out it makes a little more sense I guess its just kind of weird. So you create two xml nodes and then the add line actually creates them in the database ? And then you reference them from then on by their xml ids? Ie. in the groups attribute, so that's why it says XML ids
2008-12-19 10:02 <Timitos> vengfulsquirrel: yes. somethings like that. i think you got it.
2008-12-19 10:02 <Timitos> venfulsquirrel: i need to go now. cu
2008-12-19 10:03 <vengfulsquirrel> thanks, ttyl
2008-12-19 10:08 -!- Cristi_an(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 10:16 -!- johbo( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 10:29 <CIA-53> tryton: vengfulsquirrel * r392 /wiki/ Removed unneeded hard break from summary. Fixed lost typo. Clarify the dynamic nature of a multi-level BOM.
2008-12-19 10:43 <cedk>
2008-12-19 10:44 <cedk> that is why we remove the possibility to install modules from the GTK client
2008-12-19 10:46 <cedk> one more piece of code grabed:
2008-12-19 10:48 <vengfulsquirrel> They are just saying don't run the server as root though right ?
2008-12-19 10:49 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: yes
2008-12-19 10:50 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: but we think that there is still security issue by running the server without root and let the GTK client write codes in the addons/modules directory
2008-12-19 10:50 <vengfulsquirrel> An admin can upload modules via gtk now ?
2008-12-19 10:50 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: not in Tryton but on OpenERP
2008-12-19 10:51 <vengfulsquirrel> Oh so they can upload a module file and then technically clobber the db.
2008-12-19 10:51 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: yes
2008-12-19 10:51 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah I guess admins shouldn't be a security risk though anyways ,right ?
2008-12-19 10:51 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: and it can download module from a webserver and install it
2008-12-19 10:52 -!- sharkcz( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 10:52 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: for us, installing modules must be done on the server side for security reason
2008-12-19 10:54 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah doesn't seem like the previous functionality would really be that necessary anyways.
2008-12-19 10:56 <cedk> by the way, do you think it is right the way they added our copyright?
2008-12-19 10:57 <cedk> because they don't say that it is our copyright, they just say we take it
2008-12-19 10:57 <vengfulsquirrel> this thing --> # refactoring from Tryton ...
2008-12-19 10:57 <vengfulsquirrel> ?
2008-12-19 10:58 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: yes
2008-12-19 10:58 <cedk> for me they must put under: Copyright (C) 2004-2008 Tiny SPRL
2008-12-19 10:59 <vengfulsquirrel> Hmm yeah, I know nothing about legality, seems like there are a lot of forks though that might have dealt with code exchange with more legal vigour.
2008-12-19 10:59 -!- bechamel(n=user@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 10:59 <vengfulsquirrel> You guys exchange stuff pretty frequently though right ?
2008-12-19 11:00 <vengfulsquirrel> There is no policy right now at all ?
2008-12-19 11:01 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: when we take code from OpenERP (which happens now rarely) we put it in the COPYRIGHT file
2008-12-19 11:01 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: with every copyright of contributors
2008-12-19 11:02 <cedk> OpenERP choose to put copyright on each files, so if they grab code from Tryton they must put the content of COPYRIGHT in their copyright header
2008-12-19 11:02 <cedk> I think
2008-12-19 11:03 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah at least somewhere that isn't going to get deleted.
2008-12-19 11:03 <cedk> and with the word copyright
2008-12-19 11:09 <vengfulsquirrel> Do you both use the same license?
2008-12-19 11:14 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: as we switch to GPL-3, some months after they also switch to GPL-3 :-)
2008-12-19 11:14 <bechamel> vengfulsquirrel: tryton is gpl3 and i think openerp is also gpl3 except for the webclient (etiny) which is mpl derived
2008-12-19 11:16 <vengfulsquirrel> Well at least that must simplify things.
2008-12-19 11:18 <cedk> vengfulsquirrel: it is not the first time that we have some issue with them:
2008-12-19 11:22 <vengfulsquirrel> Ha its good thing you both have public repos.
2008-12-19 11:22 <vengfulsquirrel> *Dated
2008-12-19 11:27 -!- bechamel`(n=user@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 11:28 <vengfulsquirrel> Does anyone have any MRP use-cases they need/want especially fulfilled by the future MRP implementation?
2008-12-19 11:29 <vengfulsquirrel> It would be nice to kind of line up some use cases against what I'm envisioning, I've gotten a few from Xod of nod.
2008-12-19 11:31 -!- oversize( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 11:51 -!- cedric_b( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 11:53 <bechamel`> vengfulsquirrel: one thing you can do is to search for "mrp" on the openerp forum, at least this will give you some idea
2008-12-19 12:09 <vengfulsquirrel> ha some of these posts aren't very happy
2008-12-19 12:12 <bechamel`> vengfulsquirrel: happy people doesn't post :)
2008-12-19 12:12 <vengfulsquirrel> Yeah that is True.
2008-12-19 12:25 <vengfulsquirrel> goodnights
2008-12-19 13:08 <CIA-53> tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1130:c7c32bdb90e6 tryton/tryton/gui/window/view_form/ (14 files in 2 dirs): Improve display values when setting default values for issue595
2008-12-19 13:09 <CIA-53> tryton: ced roundup * #595/"set as default": value is not usefull/meaningfull/translated: [resolved] Fix with changeset c7c32bdb90e6
2008-12-19 13:11 <CIA-53> tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 87:9d1bb784d4d8 account_statement/de_DE.csv: Update de_DE from Mathias Behrle <>
2008-12-19 13:35 <CIA-53> tryton: ced roundup * #690/account_statement: invoice creation in editable list view should be prohibited: [chatting] Why?
2008-12-19 13:38 <yangoon> cedk: resp. copyright: AFAIS you are perfectly right, that it should be under Copyright (C) 2004-2008 Tiny SPRL
2008-12-19 13:38 <yangoon> cedk: because only that way you can enforce your rights under legal aspects
2008-12-19 13:40 <cedk> yangoon: ok, I will inform Tiny
2008-12-19 13:47 -!- yangoon( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 13:49 -!- Cristi_an__(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 13:50 -!- carlos(n=carlos@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 14:10 <CIA-53> tryton: matb roundup * #687/All labels untranslated after update: I just restarted the machine to exclude some corruption of running processes etc. Always the same behaviour, I am joining some screenshots to ill ...
2008-12-19 14:12 <CIA-53> tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1131:189934c19817 tryton/tryton/gui/ Use size_request and set resizable on main window
2008-12-19 14:13 -!- Cristi__(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 14:20 -!- yangoon( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 14:24 <CIA-53> tryton: Timitos roundup * #690/account_statement: invoice creation in editable list view should be prohibited: i see a danger in creating doubles. but perhaps i am mistaken.
2008-12-19 14:30 -!- yangoon( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 14:39 <CIA-53> tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1376:e6e097724416 trytond/trytond/ir/ Always use unicode keys for translation cache for issue687
2008-12-19 14:39 <CIA-53> tryton: ced roundup * #687/All labels untranslated after update: Fixed with changeset e6e097724416
2008-12-19 14:40 <CIA-53> tryton: ced roundup * #690/account_statement: invoice creation in editable list view should be prohibited: [resolved] We can not prevent users for creating double invoice.
2008-12-19 14:45 -!- Cristi_an__(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 14:48 <CIA-53> tryton: matb roundup * #687/All labels untranslated after update: [resolved] Fixed, thx!
2008-12-19 15:26 -!- ikks(n=igor@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 15:35 -!- Cristi__(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 15:43 -!- juanfer(n=juanfer@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 15:49 -!- matrixise(n=stephane@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 15:49 <matrixise> cedk: ?
2008-12-19 15:50 <cedk> matrixise: oui
2008-12-19 15:51 <matrixise> tu as l'url concernant ton netsvc ? ainsi je rajoute le lien en plus du copyright, cela te va ?
2008-12-19 15:51 <matrixise> j'ai pas envie de chipoter pour du refactoring
2008-12-19 15:52 <cedk> matrixise: c'est juste le copyright qu'il faut mettre
2008-12-19 15:52 <cedk> matrixise:
2008-12-19 15:59 <matrixise> cedk: done
2008-12-19 16:00 <matrixise> cedk:
2008-12-19 16:00 <cedk> matrixise: it must be in the copyright header
2008-12-19 16:01 <cedk> not under
2008-12-19 16:01 <cedk> just after the Copyright of Tiny
2008-12-19 16:11 -!- matrixise(n=stephane@ has left #tryton
2008-12-19 16:48 -!- Cristi_an__(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 16:57 -!- Cristi__(n=Cristi@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 18:07 -!- Timitos(n=Timitos@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 20:00 -!- cedk(n=ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 20:00 -!- cedk(n=ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 20:07 -!- cedk_( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 20:13 -!- ikks(n=igor@ has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 20:20 -!- cedk(n=ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 21:08 <ikks> hi panthera, let me know whenever there are packages for tryton to test them
2008-12-19 21:08 <ikks> I would be happy to help on testing.
2008-12-19 21:20 <yangoon> panthera: +1
2008-12-19 21:41 -!- Franz_Josef( has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 21:57 -!- X0d_of_N0d(i=C-C_C-X@gateway/tor/x-61134da462a943b7) has joined #tryton
2008-12-19 22:08 -!- vengfulsquirrel( has joined #tryton

Generated by 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!