IRC logs of #tryton for Wednesday, 2010-08-25 #tryton log beginning Wed Aug 25 00:00:02 CEST 2010
2010-08-25 01:40 -!- digitalsatori(~tony@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 01:48 -!- pheller(~pheller@2002:ad30:d8c3:0:fa1e:dfff:fee6:aabf) has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 02:04 -!- digitalsatori(~tony@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 02:35 -!- tekoholic( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 03:59 -!- ikks(~ikks@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 04:28 -!- gremly(~gremly@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 05:19 -!- yangoon( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 05:32 -!- tekoholic( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 07:44 -!- evernichon( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 08:03 -!- pheller( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 08:04 <pheller> cedk: good morning
2010-08-25 08:38 -!- eLBati( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 08:43 -!- enlightx( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 09:10 -!- cedk(~ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 09:17 -!- bechamel( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 10:11 -!- Red15(~red15@unaffiliated/red15) has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 10:23 <yangoon> cedk: ping
2010-08-25 10:24 <yangoon> cedk: for me it is slightly different
2010-08-25 10:24 <cedk> yangoon: what?
2010-08-25 10:25 <yangoon> cedk: follows rules, that forbid to relay with another address
2010-08-25 10:25 <yangoon> it should question freenet SPF rules, the relay
2010-08-25 10:26 <yangoon> not, the sender
2010-08-25 10:27 <cedk> yangoon:;;ip=2001:748:100:40::2:7;
2010-08-25 10:27 <yangoon> cedk: yes. thats what I am talking off
2010-08-25 10:27 <yangoon> However, the domain has declared using SPF that it does not send mail through (2001:748:100:40::2:7). That is why the message was rejected.
2010-08-25 10:27 <yangoon> but didn't send the message
2010-08-25 10:28 <cedk> yangoon: said that email with from * should be send from ip4: ip4: and reject any others
2010-08-25 10:29 <cedk> yangoon: so as you did not send it with servers, your email is rejected
2010-08-25 10:29 <yangoon> cedk: yes, I know how it works
2010-08-25 10:30 <yangoon> cedk: but those rules are quite strict and IMHO useless
2010-08-25 10:30 <yangoon> why asking for the domain of the sender?
2010-08-25 10:30 <yangoon> you have to ask for the envelope
2010-08-25 10:33 <cedk> yangoon: which envelope?
2010-08-25 10:35 <yangoon> cedk: MAIL FROM: , not FROM:
2010-08-25 10:37 <cedk> yangoon: but you used relays
2010-08-25 10:37 <yangoon> cedk: yes, why not?
2010-08-25 10:41 <cedk> yangoon: I checked the server log and the envelope is
2010-08-25 10:45 <yangoon> cedk: hmm, strange, will have to check this later, thx for your time so far
2010-08-25 11:11 -!- elver( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 11:30 -!- Okko(~Okko@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 12:17 -!- paepke( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 14:30 -!- paepke( has left #tryton
2010-08-25 15:03 -!- Okko(~Okko@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 15:41 -!- woakas( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 15:51 -!- pepeu(~manuel@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 15:54 -!- paepke( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 16:07 -!- gremly(~gremly@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 16:46 -!- digitalsatori(~tony@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 16:51 -!- pheller( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 16:51 <pheller> hello
2010-08-25 16:53 <pheller> Has there ever been any thought of installing a URL handler within Tryton? So that URLs like tryton:// would cause the client to display an appropriate form?
2010-08-25 16:53 <pheller> I started on this with the Mac app yesterday, and just wondered what others might have done.
2010-08-25 16:58 <paepke> pheller, it would be great to have something like this. especially for the mail-gateway sharoon is working on.
2010-08-25 16:59 <paepke> pheller, there were some discussions about it. but i can't remember where. irc, groups or somewhere...
2010-08-25 17:06 <pheller> paepke: yes, I was thinking of it exactly for the mail gateway
2010-08-25 17:06 <pheller> paepke: and also for "screen pops", for something like a call center
2010-08-25 17:07 <pheller> paepke: caller identifies themself to the Automatic Voice Response, and when they get to an agent, the pbx will send a message to the agent's computer with a url like tryton://sale.order/12345
2010-08-25 17:10 <paepke> pheller, there are several use cases for it. i highly recommend such a url handling.
2010-08-25 17:10 <paepke> pheller, but don't forget the database ;-)
2010-08-25 17:11 <pheller> you prefer something like: tryton://[username[:password]]@database/model/id ?
2010-08-25 17:12 <pheller> paepke: the problem is that the client only supports a single database connection at a time.... so what if you are running a wizard or something, and in the middle of it, you get an email with such a url that goes to a different database?
2010-08-25 17:12 <paepke> username/password is useless and should be avoided. the client is already authenticated if it is running.
2010-08-25 17:13 <pheller> paepke: agreed, that is why I wonder if database is needed
2010-08-25 17:14 <pheller> paepke: or did you mean something else by "but don't forget the database" ? :-)
2010-08-25 17:14 <paepke> pheller, yes, youre right with the client. but its an issue anyway if you would work for different companies on the same machine.
2010-08-25 17:14 <pheller> ah ha, ok
2010-08-25 17:14 <pheller> I see.
2010-08-25 17:15 <paepke> one option could be to have two instances running which are authenticated to different databases. but that tryton-url handler should know which one to trigger.
2010-08-25 17:16 <paepke> i'm not in that kind of message queue stuff. bit i remember on linux there is that dbus interface where different applications could listen. and if ther pops up a tryton-uri with a specific database it could decide for its own to parse that url.
2010-08-25 17:17 <paepke> and if that uri does not go out of that queue there would be spawned a new tryton client with a login prompt to the right database.
2010-08-25 17:17 <paepke> but i'm pretty sure there will be better approaches.
2010-08-25 17:18 <paepke> this one came just to my mind.
2010-08-25 17:19 <paepke> i had such an issue (working for different companies) with a client which cannot handle different logins at once. its a real life example.
2010-08-25 17:19 <paepke> but thanx god i had not to implement that uri, cause it was closed source software ;-)
2010-08-25 17:19 <pheller> Hmmh, making it spawn the client might not be easy -- at least on the Mac.
2010-08-25 17:20 <pheller> But, if there were two instances running, each with a different database, that can work.
2010-08-25 17:20 <paepke> pheller, yes, i know.i have one. you can run two instances. but its not apple's intention.
2010-08-25 17:21 <pheller> well, I'll keep working on it.
2010-08-25 17:21 <paepke> we should take care of it. its not that common but i had it already in my life. 80% of the customers don't get concerned by such a situation
2010-08-25 17:22 <pheller> probably not a 1.8 feature. maybe 2.0
2010-08-25 17:23 <paepke> pheller, well. depends on the time. its not a framework internal, its an helper feature.
2010-08-25 17:24 <pheller> paepke: right... I'm just saying that I think it will take some more time for the gtk-osx framework to be ready on the Mac.
2010-08-25 17:24 -!- tekoholic( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 17:24 <paepke> pheller, for that email-module its an must have in my eyes. otherways you break the workflow
2010-08-25 17:25 <pheller> paepke: so the email module -- do I understand correctly that it will implement an IMAP server?
2010-08-25 17:25 <paepke> pheller, you made a huge step forward by youre changeset on the mac. it is really really great.
2010-08-25 17:25 <paepke> pheller, yes.
2010-08-25 17:26 <paepke> and an input queue for smtp with an helper script
2010-08-25 17:26 <pheller> paepke: glad it's useful. I set out only to fix the problem where quitting the application blocks exit. I thought "why not keep going" :-) I'm still working on the quit from the dock menu problem.
2010-08-25 17:26 <pheller> paepke: so why implement an IMAP server? why not just send the email and allow the client to receive it with an existing account?
2010-08-25 17:28 <paepke> cause you can assign more information to it inside tryton. or have tracking of the communication between you and the customer.
2010-08-25 17:29 <paepke> there is already a messaging subsystem inside tryton.
2010-08-25 17:29 <paepke> to be more generic it will be based on email. for example exposing an imap interface to the outer world.
2010-08-25 17:30 <paepke> just the next level of exposing an calender via caldav.
2010-08-25 17:30 <paepke> or the attachments via webdav
2010-08-25 17:30 <pheller> paepke: yep, I can understand wanting to have more interaction with the client
2010-08-25 17:31 <pheller> paepke: I think there should be an option per user, though, to send requests to internal imap server, or via external email
2010-08-25 17:32 <paepke> its good to have a central tracking of the information you send around.
2010-08-25 17:33 <paepke> for example inside tryton on the party view: show me the last 10 mails the company sends to this customer.
2010-08-25 17:33 <paepke> its a step forward for a CRM system.
2010-08-25 17:34 <paepke> but anyway. The concepts are great. But i have some doubts if it can be deployed in real life to a customer.
2010-08-25 17:35 <paepke> for example: i spoke today to a friend. they will drop their linux based groupware in favour of exchange, cause for that system there will be an email-archive solution which fits into outlook.
2010-08-25 17:35 <pheller> paepke: oh absolutely. I think that many internal users would use the IMAP system, though many would prefer not to add another email acount.
2010-08-25 17:36 <paepke> the main idea is, if I understand it right to replace the email system of the customer with the tryton mail/groupware system.
2010-08-25 17:37 <pheller> paepke: it is great to have this option, but in reality, there must be the ability to send requests to a standard email address.
2010-08-25 17:37 <pheller> paepke: It will be a hard sell to a company to put an ERP system in charge of their email
2010-08-25 17:38 <pheller> but I like having it as an option
2010-08-25 17:39 -!- eLBati(~elbati@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 17:40 <paepke> pheller, yes, you could archieve this by having a virtual email-address like
2010-08-25 17:40 <paepke> pheller, as additional service.
2010-08-25 17:41 <pheller> paepke: I think most users would initially implement it so they can get:
2010-08-25 17:41 <paepke> sending mails can be rewritten to show the users real identity
2010-08-25 17:41 <pheller> from:
2010-08-25 17:41 <pheller> subject: purchase order approval
2010-08-25 17:42 <pheller> You have a new purchase order for approval at tryton://server/database/purchase.order/12345
2010-08-25 17:43 <pheller> I think that is the most important use case.
2010-08-25 17:44 <pheller> second most important is probably communication in the support module, when it's ready
2010-08-25 17:44 <paepke> pheller, think about a ticket system. someone is working on it. answering the email, which is generated from tryton, will lead to an update of the issue.
2010-08-25 17:44 <paepke> yes, right :-)
2010-08-25 17:44 <pheller> and third most important (maybe tied for second) is to be able to have all sale opportunity email routed via tryton
2010-08-25 17:45 <paepke> pheller, i agree with you. but the routing of the mails is not a tryton issue.
2010-08-25 17:45 -!- tony_(~tony@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 17:45 <paepke> its an mta issue.
2010-08-25 17:45 <pheller> oh, I don't mean routing in the MTA sense. I mean for the email to at some point touch tryton, so that it can be associated with a party, or a sale, etc.
2010-08-25 17:46 <pheller> ... and so years down the road, someone can see what was said to some party a long time ago....
2010-08-25 17:46 <pheller> ... by an employee that is maybe no longer with the company..... with normal email, this history would be long gone.
2010-08-25 17:47 <pheller> so I understand it from that perspective
2010-08-25 17:47 <paepke> pheller, and yes, for that you need an mail server inside tryton.
2010-08-25 17:47 <paepke> pheller, totally agree.
2010-08-25 17:51 <pheller> paepke: It will be interesting to do some load testing on the tryton mail server, when it is implemented
2010-08-25 17:52 <paepke> pheller, of course.
2010-08-25 17:55 <paepke> postgres will do the trick its pretty scalable.
2010-08-25 17:55 <paepke> pheller, i'm currently playing around with an nosql backend for the attachment module. it looks very promising.
2010-08-25 17:56 <paepke> and scaleable.
2010-08-25 17:56 <pheller> neat
2010-08-25 18:20 -!- enlightx( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 19:02 -!- cedk(~ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 20:11 -!- pheller( has left #tryton
2010-08-25 21:16 -!- bechamel( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 21:18 -!- enlightx( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 21:18 -!- zodman(~Miranda@ has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 21:27 <pepeu> cedk, you here?
2010-08-25 21:28 <pepeu> i asked yesterday if there is a project for the POS module?
2010-08-25 21:28 <cedk> pepeu: yes, but I'm leaving for launch :-(
2010-08-25 21:30 <pepeu> ok, how I can participate in this project
2010-08-25 21:32 <pepeu> POS I am doing depends POS module, but is an independent client
2010-08-25 21:33 <pepeu> to improve the interface, and as you told me use pygtk, far right
2010-08-25 21:39 <pepeu> cedk, see you tomorrow
2010-08-25 22:06 -!- Okko( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 22:10 -!- pheller( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 22:15 -!- Red15(~red15@unaffiliated/red15) has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 22:30 -!- zodman(~zodman@foresight/developer/zodman) has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 23:10 -!- cedk_( has joined #tryton
2010-08-25 23:40 <pheller> cedk: question about key accelerators in the client
2010-08-25 23:42 <pheller> cedk: there is a collision between "N" for "New Form", and for "No" (in save dialog). Should I do something like make New Form Ctrl-Shift-N? (rather than just Ctrl-N)?
2010-08-25 23:43 <cedk> pheller: it is alt in dialog and ctrl for shortcut
2010-08-25 23:44 <pheller> cedk: hmmh, ok, this must be a gtk-osx thing. For me, it is Ctrl in dialog.
2010-08-25 23:44 <pheller> cedk: I'll see if I can fix that too.
2010-08-25 23:45 <cedk> pheller: shortcut are editable
2010-08-25 23:45 <pheller> you mean via the ?
2010-08-25 23:46 <cedk> pheller: by typing it in the menu
2010-08-25 23:47 <pheller> ah
2010-08-25 23:47 <yangoon> pheller: after activating Menubar/Change Accelerators
2010-08-25 23:48 <pheller> yangoon: ah, ok. I'm just changing the default from alt to cmd for Mac.
2010-08-25 23:48 <pheller> yangoon: but for some reason, mac doesn't default to alt accelerators for dialogs.
2010-08-25 23:49 <yangoon> pheller: should be a gtk-osx issue, as you say
2010-08-25 23:58 -!- sharoon( has joined #tryton

Generated by 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!