IRC logs of #tryton for Thursday, 2012-12-13 #tryton log beginning Thu Dec 13 00:00:01 CET 2012
2012-12-13 12:23 <sisalp> hello
2012-12-13 12:24 <sisalp> I'd like to use thems for the gtk client and set the them from the server
2012-12-13 12:25 <sisalp> the idea is to differentiate the them of the client on different servers used simultaneously
2012-12-13 12:25 <sisalp> so mistakes can be avoided.
2012-12-13 12:25 <sisalp> is it a silly idea ?
2012-12-13 12:26 <yangoon1> sisalp: rather difficult, if possible at all
2012-12-13 12:26 <yangoon1> sisalp: there is the status line
2012-12-13 12:26 <yangoon1> sisalp: isn't it enough?
2012-12-13 12:27 <sisalp> yangoon1: it should, but in practice, I'll be the first trapped
2012-12-13 12:29 <sisalp> them could be chosen at client level with connection parameters or in the preferences if the server cannot know which thems are available on the desktop
2012-12-13 12:29 <sisalp> s/them/they/
2012-12-13 12:29 <yangoon> sisalp: you could customize the client to show the server more prominently
2012-12-13 12:30 <yangoon> sisalp: but themes are clearly a property of the gtk installation of the client machine
2012-12-13 12:31 <sisalp> yangoon: a color is better than a text you must read and understand every time
2012-12-13 12:31 <sisalp> I thought "them", but the requirement is a colored indicator
2012-12-13 12:32 <sisalp> "red for our production server, grey for tryton demo project ...
2012-12-13 12:32 <yangoon> sisalp: perhaps there could be shown a random color per connection, but I doubt it will find the approval of cedk
2012-12-13 12:34 <sisalp> for cedk, we could rephrase it as "show a custom logo somewhere," ;-)
2012-12-13 12:34 <sisalp> I don't like the random assignment either
2012-12-13 12:35 <sisalp> the point it to decide if it is useful or not I think
2012-12-13 12:37 <sisalp> any support from others ? please ;-)
2012-12-13 12:37 <bechamel`> sisalp: changing the status color is far easier than the gtk theme
2012-12-13 12:37 <yangoon> :)
2012-12-13 12:38 <bechamel`> and IMO not a bad idea, maybe this should be a good idea for a plugin
2012-12-13 12:38 <bechamel`> s/should/would/
2012-12-13 12:39 <sisalp> bechamel`: yes it could be the background color of the status area
2012-12-13 12:39 <sisalp> the point is that it is a perser request, not a per database one
2012-12-13 12:39 <sisalp> per server
2012-12-13 12:40 <sisalp> I tell users : when you need to experiment, copy your database to anoter server first
2012-12-13 12:40 <sisalp> then don't play on the wrong server !
2012-12-13 12:41 <bechamel`> sisalp: or per server-db couple
2012-12-13 12:42 <sisalp> To reduce risk, I usually recommand a single database when production data are involved, but others may work differently indeed
2012-12-13 12:43 <bechamel`> (afk)
2012-12-13 18:28 <jbwiv> can someone tell me why one might choose tryton instead of openerp? I saw a recent discussion on HN where sharoon thomas tore apart openerp ( but didn't really explain why tryton was any better. Plus, openerp has a web client which is pretty important to us. Any advice/insight you can offer would be appreciated
2012-12-13 18:40 <rmu> jbwiv: one thing should nail it for everyone that thinks about using openerp for accounting: they seem to be (still!) using float for monetary calculations
2012-12-13 18:42 <jbwiv> rmu: what should they be using?
2012-12-13 18:42 <jbwiv> ah, never mind. I understand what you're saying
2012-12-13 18:44 <jbwiv> rmu: in practive, does that become a problem? and if so, does tryton do it differently?
2012-12-13 18:48 <rmu> jbwiv: i would not trust any software that uses floating point for this. many numbers you can't be expressed exactly in floating point, and this will hurt you
2012-12-13 18:48 <cedk> jbwiv: it is a problem if you want to compute correctly
2012-12-13 18:49 <cedk> jbwiv: any way, it is a long list to enumerate all the differences
2012-12-13 18:50 <cedk> jbwiv: but the main difference is that Tryton tries to build a generic framework for business application when OpenERP tries to sale Saas to SME
2012-12-13 18:51 <cedk> jbwiv: for the web client, the community founded B2CK to write one
2012-12-13 18:51 <cedk> jbwiv:
2012-12-13 18:53 <cedk> jbwiv: but perhaps, you should explain what you are expecting then we could give you advise if Tryton is right for you or not
2012-12-13 18:54 <cedk> jbwiv:
2012-12-13 18:54 <jbwiv> cedk: notifications aren't working correctly for some reason
2012-12-13 18:54 <jbwiv> cedk: i have an in-house ERP I'd like to find a replacement for...preferably one which isn't COTS
2012-12-13 18:55 <jbwiv> looking at openerp, adempiere, and openbravo...openerp seemed to be most open and I like the fact that it's in python
2012-12-13 18:55 <jbwiv> it'd need to support about 1000 users
2012-12-13 18:55 <jbwiv> current system is a legacy system. We own it
2012-12-13 18:55 <cedk> jbwiv: what are you managing with it?
2012-12-13 18:55 <jbwiv> internal staff
2012-12-13 18:56 <jbwiv> it's painful to maintain and extend
2012-12-13 18:56 <jbwiv> and it's old
2012-12-13 18:57 <cedk> jbwiv: ok but what are your requirements?
2012-12-13 18:58 <jbwiv> cedk: accounting, purchasing/inventory/receiving (basically warehouse mgmt), project management (we'll have to customize this, we do it differently), HR/Payroll, Tool tracking (yet another custom thing we'll likely have to do)
2012-12-13 18:58 <jbwiv> our current system does quite a lot I guess
2012-12-13 18:59 <jbwiv> ultimately, it'd be nice to also have mrp, but that's not a day one requirement
2012-12-13 18:59 <cedk> jbwiv: Tryton has modules on all that subject
2012-12-13 19:00 <cedk> jbwiv: but if your process are a little bit complex, customisation will be required
2012-12-13 19:00 <cedk> jbwiv: but that's not an issue in Tryton as we try to be a modular/flexible as possible
2012-12-13 19:00 <jbwiv> cedk, so does tryton "right" all of openerp's "wrongs"?
2012-12-13 19:00 <cedk> jbwiv: which is not the case of OpenERP
2012-12-13 19:01 <cedk> jbwiv: all I found wrong in OpenERP, I fix it in Tryton
2012-12-13 19:01 <jbwiv> cedk, be back in a few, I have a visitor. still, I'm interested in continuing the discussion
2012-12-13 19:01 <cedk> jbwiv: ok
2012-12-13 19:18 <rmu> just found this
2012-12-13 19:20 <cedk> rmu: we can not claim too much that our ORM is much better (base on same basis)
2012-12-13 19:20 <cedk> rmu: but the python-sql project has the goal to improve that
2012-12-13 19:25 <rmu> cedk: at least most of the spaghetti is gone
2012-12-13 19:25 <cedk> rmu: yes of course
2012-12-13 19:26 <cedk> rmu: but I'm still not very proude of ModelSQL.{read,search,write,delete}
2012-12-13 19:26 <cedk> and at least we have a lot of unittest on this part
2012-12-13 19:30 <rmu> what will be substantially different with python-sql?
2012-12-13 19:31 <cedk> rmu: the SQL string construction
2012-12-13 19:31 <cedk> rmu: instead of using str concatination, it will use Python object
2012-12-13 19:31 <jbwiv> alright...back.
2012-12-13 19:32 <cedk> rmu: using that will allow to have better composition of SQL queries
2012-12-13 19:32 <jbwiv> so what does one give up by using openerp over tryton?
2012-12-13 19:32 <jbwiv> woops
2012-12-13 19:32 <jbwiv> I mean tryton over openerp
2012-12-13 19:32 <cedk> rmu: like function field returning SQL clause instead of (id, in, [...])
2012-12-13 19:32 <rmu> cedk: would it be possible to manipulate the sql in "abstract" python-sql form from modules?
2012-12-13 19:33 <cedk> rmu: yes it is the goal
2012-12-13 19:33 <cedk> jbwiv: the aggressive marketing :-)
2012-12-13 19:34 <cedk> jbwiv: Tryton has less modules but it is working modules
2012-12-13 19:34 <jbwiv> cedk, really? that's all? I suppose a web interface too for now
2012-12-13 19:35 <cedk> jbwiv: for now, yes but our GTK client is much usable than the web client of OpenERP
2012-12-13 19:35 <cedk> jbwiv: you can use it with keyboard only
2012-12-13 19:35 <jbwiv> cedk, if you didn't have tryton to choose, what would you then use? OpenERP or one of the others?
2012-12-13 19:35 <jbwiv> cedk, that's nice...our current erp is terminal based, so our users have keys memorized. going to point and click will be a challenge for them
2012-12-13 19:35 <cedk> jbwiv: for information, I worked at OpenERP (when it was named TinyERP)
2012-12-13 19:36 <cedk> jbwiv: so I worked on OpenERP
2012-12-13 19:36 <jbwiv> cedk, cool. are there any positives you'd say for openerp?
2012-12-13 19:37 <jbwiv> seems like sharoon has an agenda of some sort. he's very negative in tweets and on the HN thread
2012-12-13 19:37 <cedk> jbwiv: I'm still the 9th contributor to OpenERP:
2012-12-13 19:37 <jbwiv> I'm looking for a more objective view...someone who can share the benefits and drawbacks
2012-12-13 19:37 <jbwiv> but I won't get this from a partner of course ;-)
2012-12-13 19:38 <jbwiv> cedk: you know it well ;)
2012-12-13 19:38 <cedk> jbwiv: sharoon is just upset by OpenERP SA because he trust in the marketing at first and got a lot of trouble when installing OpenERP for his customers
2012-12-13 19:38 <cedk> jbwiv: then he switches to Tryton and succeed to solve the problems
2012-12-13 19:39 <jbwiv> interesting...did he do any sort of write up on his troubles?
2012-12-13 19:39 <jbwiv> wonder if I could buy an hour or two of his time to discuss
2012-12-13 19:39 <cedk> jbwiv: he comes here from time to time
2012-12-13 19:40 <jbwiv> cedk, is tryton considered an out of the box solution or is it more a framework for building business apps?
2012-12-13 19:40 <cedk> jbwiv: other stuff, you win with Tryton: free migration from releases
2012-12-13 19:41 <cedk> jbwiv: depends of your requirements
2012-12-13 19:41 <Telesight> jbwiv: OpenERP has some "empty" modules.
2012-12-13 19:41 <cedk> jbwiv: there are people using it out of the box for SME
2012-12-13 19:41 <jbwiv> Telesight, empty?
2012-12-13 19:41 <jbwiv> cedk, sorry...SME?
2012-12-13 19:41 <cedk> jbwiv: Small Medium Entreprise
2012-12-13 19:41 <cedk> jbwiv: SME=SMB
2012-12-13 19:41 <Telesight> Yes only a name but not real functionality ..
2012-12-13 19:42 <cedk> jbwiv: there are people using it to build their own solution
2012-12-13 19:42 <cedk> jbwiv: without using any Tryton modules
2012-12-13 19:42 <jbwiv> cedk, I see. so if I wanted to weigh a possible implementation of tryton, who would I approach? are their "partners"?
2012-12-13 19:42 <cedk> jbwiv: there is also some guys connecting Tryton with some kind of sensors to retrieve data
2012-12-13 19:43 <cedk> jbwiv:
2012-12-13 19:43 <cedk> jbwiv: a list of companies providing services on Tryton
2012-12-13 19:43 <cedk> jbwiv: I'm from B2CK
2012-12-13 19:43 <jbwiv> one in the US :-/
2012-12-13 19:43 <cedk> jbwiv: there is also GNUHealth
2012-12-13 19:44 <cedk> jbwiv: a hospital management system
2012-12-13 19:44 <Telesight> jbwiv: And showstopper bugs are only repeared when you pay for it, too risky for small businesses that have not a lot of money.
2012-12-13 19:45 <jbwiv> I've heard that one knock against openerp is that it doesn't do American-style accounting well and won't make sense to most US accountants, although on that HN thread I think one of their directors said this wasn't the case. What about tryton? is it too european for US companies?
2012-12-13 19:45 <cedk> jbwiv: not yet, but OpenLabs has office in Miami
2012-12-13 19:45 <jbwiv> Telesight, we're not a wealthy company by any means, but we're not necessarily small either. Medium-size...we have around 2.5K employees total
2012-12-13 19:47 <cedk> jbwiv: don't know exactly what are the critics about US accounting practice
2012-12-13 19:48 <cedk> jbwiv: for me, the base of the account module of Tryton is quite simple and generic
2012-12-13 19:48 <Telesight> jbwiv: No I understand. But small ones do go with OSS because the lack of expensive licenses othe ERP's have.
2012-12-13 19:48 <jbwiv> Telesight, yeah, and me, I'm a big open source guy, so although we could probably afford an COTS, I don't want one. I like having the source ;-)
2012-12-13 19:49 <jbwiv> cedk: see this comment:
2012-12-13 19:49 <cedk> jbwiv: we have now a Foundation to protect Tryton as OSS
2012-12-13 19:49 <Telesight> Now we are talking ;-)
2012-12-13 19:50 <jbwiv> one place I've found openerp lacking is the documentation. is tryton better in this regards? OpenERP's was completely out of date when I was setting it up...very frustrating
2012-12-13 19:51 <cedk> jbwiv: about reports, I think Tryton has quite generic report but easy to customize
2012-12-13 19:52 <cedk> jbwiv: about taxes, I don't know. The davidbrent doesn't explain what doesn't work
2012-12-13 19:52 <cedk> jbwiv: but anyway, we have at least the same functionnality as OE
2012-12-13 19:53 <cedk> jbwiv: about doc, this is not our best point :-) But at least we keep doc in the same repo as the code and update it when code change
2012-12-13 19:53 <Telesight> jbwiv: OSS and documentation :-(
2012-12-13 19:53 <cedk> jbwiv: so it is normally accurate
2012-12-13 19:53 <jbwiv> cedk, ok, cool. thanks guys. I have a lot of thinking/exploring to do
2012-12-13 19:53 <Telesight> We made ones a start but we have to update it:
2012-12-13 19:54 <cedk> jbwiv: but code is readable at least compare to OE :-)
2012-12-13 19:54 <Telesight> THe documentation must preferably doen with Sphinx.
2012-12-13 19:57 <jbwiv> ok, thanks to both of you. I appreciate it
2012-12-13 19:57 <Telesight> jbwiv: Hopefully you will not have a sleepless night ...
2012-12-13 19:58 <jbwiv> Telesight, more like a sleepless series of months. One does not take switching 1K users to another ERP lightly :-/
2012-12-13 20:01 <Telesight> jbwiv: Well good luck!
2012-12-13 20:03 <jbwiv> Telesight, thanks!
2012-12-13 20:17 <rmu> cedk: is it somehow possible to have things like production orders, deliveries etc.. show up in the calendar?
2012-12-13 20:17 <rmu> without copy/pasting most of calendar_todo?
2012-12-13 20:23 <cedk> rmu: I think it should be solve with the calendar view antoinne did during GSoC
2012-12-13 20:25 <rmu> hmm. i would like it to show up in caldav for various reasons
2012-12-13 20:25 <cedk> rmu: then you have to sync it
2012-12-13 20:26 <rmu> create calendar.todo-records?
2012-12-13 20:26 <cedk> rmu: why not
2012-12-13 20:27 <cedk> rmu: I think it could be a generic module to sync any Model to calendar
2012-12-13 20:27 <rmu> will probably do it... but in ideal world, i would inherit some calender-thingy, implement some mapping/getters/... and be set ;)
2012-12-13 20:29 <cedk> rmu: don't think it is the right way because one record could be put in different calendars
2012-12-13 20:31 <cedk> rmu: I'm thinking about something similar to triggers
2012-12-13 20:31 <rmu> i'm thinking of something like a "view"
2012-12-13 20:34 <cedk> rmu: then it will not be generic
2012-12-13 20:59 <rmu> cedk: the "view" would be a customization
2012-12-13 21:27 <rmu> hmm. calendar and calendar_todo already contain much "duplicated" code...
2012-12-13 21:27 <rmu> is there really any substantial difference between "todo" and "event"?
2012-12-13 23:03 <sisalp> hello do you know about a shop example of Nereide ?
2012-12-13 23:04 <cedk> sisalp: should ask to sharoon
2012-12-13 23:05 <sisalp> cedk: yes, sharron is not in, maybe some one noted that when he presented at TUL
2012-12-13 23:06 <cedk> sisalp: he is always a little bit secret with such information :-)
2012-12-13 23:06 <sisalp> I'll ask privatly then
2012-12-13 23:06 <cedk> sisalp: nothing on the website?
2012-12-13 23:07 <sisalp> I'm too respectful of my customers'privacy
2012-12-13 23:07 <cedk> sisalp: I mean on the website of nereid
2012-12-13 23:11 <sisalp> cedk: didn't find this site
2012-12-13 23:13 <sisalp> nereide and tryton : the picture :
2012-12-13 23:16 <sisalp>

Generated by 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!