I have been using the erpnext since 18 months now and there is one basic improvement that I would like to suggest. The suggestion is for the way we import/create new items and the way they are maintained.
Basically we have an option to create an item code by ourselves, but honestly speaking this, in my limited knowledge of ERP or any stock management system, is not correct. Why I say this because giving users the right to create a PRIMARY KEY is not a good option and this ways people would always be asking questions on forums as to what way they should design their item codes which is a very VAST subject given the type of items that are there in the world.
Now my suggestion is that the item codes should be generated automatically and now that would give a problem of entering data. Now I suggest that in transactions the search of items should be through FILTERS which can be changes with CUSTOM FIELDS, this would make the usability and implementation of ERP much easier for users not having a lot of prior experience with creating item codes.
But the major requirement would be for this kind of system would be the ability to SEARCH with a combination of both FILTERS and WILD CARD search. The filters would need to be dynamic and I don’t know how much load would this functionality give on the SYSTEM as a whole because I guess it would be much more severe in terms of performance from the existing system.
This is a suggestion which I think would be much more important once we have the Webshop since after that a lot of people would be eager to join in but would get bogged down by the immense work of creating item codes as it is one of the major problems for people coming to a computerised inventory from a manual system
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “ERPNext Technical Forum” group.
The easiest way to de-codify items is to name them descriptively (primary keys in ERPNext are 180 characters long so its easy to do that). I think it would still be better than sequential naming.
Why we strongly recommend codification is because of the problem of duplicates.
(this discussion is best left in the user-forum!)
best,
Rushabh
----------------------------------------------------- ERPNext - Business Operating System
I have been using the erpnext since 18 months now and there is one basic improvement that I would like to suggest. The suggestion is for the way we import/create new items and the way they are maintained.
Basically we have an option to create an item code by ourselves, but honestly speaking this, in my limited knowledge of ERP or any stock management system, is not correct. Why I say this because giving users the right to create a PRIMARY KEY is not a good option and this ways people would always be asking questions on forums as to what way they should design their item codes which is a very VAST subject given the type of items that are there in the world.
Now my suggestion is that the item codes should be generated automatically and now that would give a problem of entering data. Now I suggest that in transactions the search of items should be through FILTERS which can be changes with CUSTOM FIELDS, this would make the usability and implementation of ERP much easier for users not having a lot of prior experience with creating item codes.
But the major requirement would be for this kind of system would be the ability to SEARCH with a combination of both FILTERS and WILD CARD search. The filters would need to be dynamic and I don't know how much load would this functionality give on the SYSTEM as a whole because I guess it would be much more severe in terms of performance from the existing system.
This is a suggestion which I think would be much more important once we have the Webshop since after that a lot of people would be eager to join in but would get bogged down by the immense work of creating item codes as it is one of the major problems for people coming to a computerised inventory from a manual system
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “ERPNext Technical Forum” group.