Openbravo Issue Tracking System - Openbravo ERP
View Issue Details
0028864Openbravo ERPA. Platformpublic2015-02-04 16:052022-02-01 08:07
lorenzofidalgo 
Triage Platform Base 
normalminoralways
newopen 
5
main 
 
Google Chrome
Core
No
0028864: Approval preferences configuration should be improved. It is limited and not all preferences follow the same pattern.
By default, on the example data shipped with the product approval preferences are set as N for all users and, as it is written in http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Retail:Configuration_Guide#Approvals, [^] it is necessary to specify supervisors that were able to approve the different actions that are defined by preferences. Otherwise it would not be possible to perform those actions.

See an example in the steps to reproduce.
"WEB POS Discretionary Discount Approval" preference behaviour is different than the other preferences due to even having the preference set as N by default, it is not required a supervisor to get the approval because "Approval Required" checkbox (This checkbox is in "Discounts and promotions" window [See first attached screenshot]) has priority over this preference when this preference is set as N, but when it is set as Y, preference has a higher priority. This checkbox appoints if a discretionary discount is going to need to be approved by a supervisor or not. The behaviour only happens in this preference.

This is shown marking preferences as disabled. You can see that doing that, approval preferences can't be performed, because a supervisor is needed to continue with the process, except in "WEB POS Discretionary Discount Approval" preference situation. As said, following the pattern, it should be mandatory that discretionary discounts would be approved by supervisors, without "Approval Required" checkbox dependence.
Through this kind of behaviour it is creating two different types of discretionary discounts, those who need to be approved and those who do not. This could be exactly what it is necessary: to split discretionary discounts in theses two groups. But not as the current way, being only split depending on that checkbox.

By the other hand, it is too complex for a user to set approval preferences in a real enterprise. We could imagine a "simple" situation where this enterprise would have two organizations. In the first organization only two people can't approve some action and in the second one, only one person can approve that certain action. The simplest situation for that context would require five or more preferences for just this approval preference. (See second attached screenshot).

Moreover, there is not possibility to set a hierarchy. It has been assumed that once a person is a supervisor for certain action, he is able to approve that action for every employee, but it can be necessary that "person B" only would be able to approve actions from "person C" and that a "person A" would be able to approve "person B" or similar situations. This is not possible with the current approval preference situation.
No tags attached.
png ApprovalRequiredCheckbox.png (44,284) 2015-02-04 16:05
https://issues.openbravo.com/file_download.php?file_id=7768&type=bug
png

png 5PreferencesRequired.png (71,597) 2015-02-04 16:05
https://issues.openbravo.com/file_download.php?file_id=7769&type=bug
png
Issue History
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoNew Issue
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoAssigned To => alostale
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoFile Added: ApprovalRequiredCheckbox.png
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoWeb browser => Google Chrome
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoModules => Core
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoTriggers an Emergency Pack => No
2015-02-04 16:05lorenzofidalgoFile Added: 5PreferencesRequired.png
2015-02-04 16:12plujanWeb browserGoogle Chrome => Google Chrome
2015-02-04 16:12plujanSummaryApproval preferences configuration should be upgraded. It is limited and not all preferences follow the same pattern. => Approval preferences configuration should be improved. It is limited and not all preferences follow the same pattern.
2015-02-04 16:12plujanDescription Updatedbug_revision_view_page.php?rev_id=7620#r7620
2015-02-04 16:12plujanSteps to Reproduce Updatedbug_revision_view_page.php?rev_id=7622#r7622
2015-02-04 16:12plujanProposed Solution updated
2017-04-10 14:35alostaleAssigned Toalostale => platform
2021-08-11 10:52lorenzofidalgoFile Added: 1-AllOKHere.mov
2021-08-11 10:53lorenzofidalgoFile Deleted: 1-AllOKHere.mov
2022-02-01 08:07alostaleAssigned Toplatform => Triage Platform Base

There are no notes attached to this issue.