Thank you for the idea.
We were considering it but as of now decided that another (even very nice) deployment option sits much lower in the list of our priorities compared to increase of Openbravo functionality. So as of now not in plans for 2015 and 2016.
No, only PostgreSQL and Oracle
Client Only access level looks like a "usage characteristic" of the information more than a "semantic characteristic". I mean, I don't see any case in which -from a semantic point of view- it is wrong to store information at organization level if you can do it at client level. Because of that I would not implement this feature as a new "Access level". But still it makes full sense to enforce this validation in many cases. You can easily do it by adding a validation in the application dictionary to the organization field you want to restrict. The validation rule could be named "Client only" and it filters organizaiton_id = 0. It would ensure that "client level" in an easy and clean way. So instead of changing the access level of the information you add a validation. Hope it closes this request.
I am sorry to say but this feature was de-prioritized in our backlog and so far is not planned.
During October and November we will be defining our 2014 Roadmap and will definitely will look at it once again.
As always it is possible to sponsor the development if you want to have committed dates.
Reservation based on the Sales Orders and an ability to lock goods manually is released
Reservation for work orders (work requirements) is not done and not yet planned (we are ready to consider collaborative development requests for it).
Thank you for the idea.
At first just in case we have an integration with Magento, http://www.openbravo.com/modules-catalog (Connectors tab).
We also think on ideas to have integrated e-commerce solution. As a rough cut and one of the options we were thinking that it can be build based on the Web POS. But at the moment it is not in our current Roadmap.
From Zaher Reda on November 18, 2012 9:56 p.m.
Companies nowadays are working in different countries with different laws and regulations in each. One major obstacle for such companies to adopt OB is that it is limited to a single number format per instance. As a real life example, if I have configured OB for a branch in country X, where they use the French standards, ie. the thousand separator is the dot (.) and the decimal places are separated by a comma (,), and I need to setup other countries where they follow another number format (OB’s default), the dot (.) is the decimal places separator, and the comma is the thousands separator, then I have problems implementing a system that meets all my organizations legal standards/requirements.
So one major requirement for OB, which is surely easy to do, is to have different number formats, per organization, and one for the client.
That is an interesting feature but I also think it can be managed by yourself.
Most probably you want an amount as a text to be present on the printed document.
1. You can use for example Description field (or create your own field) of the invoice to manually fill it in with the amount as a text.
And then create your own printed document template (modifying existing) that prints this field of the invoice where you want.
2. A bit advance feature would be to do conversion to text automatically. This part of course would depend on the language you need for your documents. It will be really nice module to publish. And if you develop it for English it might be nice contribution to the core product.
We do not have this idea as a separate project so I cannot share with you stats you mentioned.
At the same time we try to use it as much as we can as a general guideline for all of our new developments and during refactor of the old functionality.
* The very recent example of it that was just discussed in another idea is a New Costing Engine.
* The biggest one delivered in Openbravo 3 is Advanced Payables and Receivables Management.
* There are more smaller ones like Delete Client process or others that you can find in our Roadmap in a list of completed things.
Landed cost is the part of the Roadmap, http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Openbravo_ERP_roadmap#Financial_.26_Accounting.
Sorry about the delay with an answer.
As of now we have delivered:
1. MP13. New Cost Calculation Engine (including average costing method)
Costing engine that supports organization and warehouse based costing. It incorporates Average as a first costing method. It also allows to include different costing algorithms as modules. Later it will be enriched with LIFO and FIFO support among other costing methods.
2. MP14. FIFO module on top of above engine.
LIFO and Landed Costs were postponed from the Roadmap (at least till the end of 2012). But as for any of the functionalities that are in general in our Roadmap we are happy to collaborate with you if you think on developing and contributing this functionality or on sponsoring it.
New Cost Calculation Engine is released, http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Release_Notes/3.0MP13.
FIFO costing module is released, http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Release_Notes/3.0MP14#Extensions.
As of now Openbravo does not support DB2 and we don´t have short-mid term plan to do it. There is a long-term goal of being in general database independent but it is really a long run task.
I know that DB2 guys themselves were using Openbravo to test DB2 Oracle compatibility mode and were able to make Openbravo running on DB2. https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/SQLTips4DB2LUW/entry/openbravomigration?lang=en
At the same time I don´t know how deep they tested it and there are cases like modules work that might have problems with this approach. You can try to follow this path but we (Openbravo) won´t be able to support you.
This idea makes all the sense but we cannot provide time horizon for this (it is not in our mid-term Roadmap).
As of now Openbravo is a horizontal platform. But it is distributed through Partners who are either specializing in particular industries / countries and so are providing vertical solutions that are exact fit for particular industries / countries or can adapt Openbravo for a particular customer request.AdminDmitry Mezentsev (Product Development Director, Openbravo) supported this idea ·
So far decision is no-go. Position is similar to the stated in this blog, http://blogs.computerworld.com/15510/the_end_of_sql_and_relational_databases_part_1_of_3
It is explained here, http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Alert.
Please use Openbravo Forums next time for such questions, http://forge.openbravo.com/projects/openbravoerp/forum/
This tool is to propose new features, rate them and to discuss these proposals.
In the current product it is possible to implement (work-around) this feature using standard Discount functionality: create Discount and name it "Early Payment" and change printing form to reflect such discount not as a product line but as a discount.AdminDmitry Mezentsev (Product Development Director, Openbravo) shared this idea ·
Activity is not part of the Production but is just another Accounting Dimension we have, http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Accounting_Schema#Account_Schema_Element.
So if you enable this dimension and make it visible through Application Dictionary for the windows you need - then you will be able to analyze all your transactions using Activity as a parameter, for example here, http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Accounting_Transaction_Details.
Anyway if you have some plans for such module it would be really interesting for us to have a look at it because we might find some synergies with our Roadmap because we have there Analytical Accounting: (Cost Centers, Markets, divisions).
If collaboration is interesting for you here you can get in touch with Pablo Sarobe, pablo dot sarobe at openbravo dot com.
This is a good idea and something that we have already discussed internally several times.
>For example a store manager performs same role in any of the store, currently we have to duplicate the role for each organization.
Why don´t you just set Org Access for the store manager role to all Orgs it has an access to?
Done but documentation is pending.
Use = before the operation.