|View Issue Details|
|Type||Category||Severity||Reproducibility||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|defect||[Openbravo ERP] 09. Financial management||major||have not tried||2009-06-05 00:47||2009-06-23 00:00|
|Priority||normal||Resolution||duplicate||Fixed in Version|
|Status||closed||Fix in branch||Fixed in SCM revision|
|OS||Linux 64 bit||Database||PostgreSQL||Java version|
|OS Version||Database version||Ant version|
|Product Version||2.50MP1||SCM revision|
|Review Assigned To|
|Regression introduced in release|
|Regression introduced by commit|
|Triggers an Emergency Pack||No|
0009339: Can not select organizations in account combination
|Description||When defining a new account combination (or when changing an existing one) I can not select my summary level organization nor the * organization.|
|Steps To Reproduce||1. Define an organization hierarchy like:|
A (legal entity with accounting; marked as "summary")
C (user defined)
2. go to Financial Management || Accounting || Setup || Account Combination
3. create a new record
4. you won't see the organization A in the list nor the * organization
|Proposed Solution||May relate to the issue 0009276|
|Tags||No tags attached.|
The key issue is in the definition of organizations (see my notes to 0009276).
The workaround for "summary level" organizations described there as well.
Still open the question for * organization:
Why we can't define account combinations for * organization ???
thanks for reporting this issue. As you state, this is definitely a duplicate of 9276; please monitor the progress on that issue.
We would not consider the issue critical as there 2 workarounds identified (thanks for reporting the second workaround).
edited on: 2009-06-05 15:17
I left my issue open since it has an aspect which 9276 does not have:
my finding published in 9276 solves display of "summary level" organization
but I can not create account combination for * organization (and * is not summary level organisation)
My iss would not be resolved by the 9276 resolution.
|Eduardo, can you please comment on this issue? Thanks.|
edited on: 2009-06-05 15:59
Eduardo, you are the ultimate expert on this matter and you should probably decide whether this is a defect or not.
My take is that it is not.
The semantics of the * organization is that you should be able to define reference data in * but not transactions (see http://wiki.openbravo.com/wiki/Functional_Documentation/General_Setup#Security.2FMulti-organization [^]).
According to this semantics, you certainly should be able to define an account combination within the context of the * organization (except that combinations are defined within the context of an accounting schema and not the context of an organization) but I am not sure whether you should be able to use * as one of its dimensions.
The idea of the accounting combination dimensions is that, when you create an accounting entry using this combination, if the originating document does not have a value for that dimension, the value coming from the code combination is used instead and stored in the Fact_acct table.
Using * as an organization dimension in the Fact_acct table would not be correct as the content of Fact_acct is transactional and that would contradict the semantics of *.
In any case, this is a moot point because, as it happens, organization is a mandatory attribute on all table so the organization dimension is always taken from the originating document and not the accounting combination.
Therefore, the organization value that you choose here is not relevant (see workaround 1 for issue 9276).
For both of these reasons I think this is not a defect.
|You might also want to monitor feature request 4266 (which you are already monitoring).|
I have seen account combinations of * organization generaed during the initial client setup (with accounting option).
I do not see them in the preinstalled "Accounting Test" client ... so I started missing them :]
Please Eduardo, answer this issue
Reminder sent to: eduardo_Argal
Changing to status new, since status feedback is appropriate when we are waiting for feedback from the reporter.
In this case, additional comments are expected from the assignee and nothing is stopping us from progressing this issue.
Yes, This is a bug. Summary organizations should be displayed as well. This should be fixed, but it is not major, maybe minor. I mean, the organization of a valid combination is never used as when posting a document the organization is always taken from the document itself.
Sorry for the late response
|This issue is duplicated of 0009276|
|2009-06-05 00:47||DavidV||New Issue|
|2009-06-05 00:47||DavidV||Assigned To||=> rafaroda|
|2009-06-05 03:30||DavidV||Note Added: 0016970|
|2009-06-05 06:55||pjuvara||Relationship added||duplicate of 0009276|
|2009-06-05 06:55||pjuvara||Status||new => closed|
|2009-06-05 06:55||pjuvara||Note Added: 0016972|
|2009-06-05 06:55||pjuvara||Duplicate ID||0 => 9276|
|2009-06-05 06:55||pjuvara||Resolution||open => duplicate|
|2009-06-05 15:10||DavidV||Status||closed => new|
|2009-06-05 15:10||DavidV||Resolution||duplicate => open|
|2009-06-05 15:10||DavidV||Note Added: 0017024|
|2009-06-05 15:17||DavidV||Note Edited: 0017024|
|2009-06-05 15:24||rafaroda||Note Added: 0017025|
|2009-06-05 15:24||rafaroda||Assigned To||rafaroda => eduardo_Argal|
|2009-06-05 15:24||rafaroda||Severity||critical => major|
|2009-06-05 15:50||pjuvara||Note Added: 0017030|
|2009-06-05 15:52||pjuvara||Note Added: 0017031|
|2009-06-05 15:52||pjuvara||Relationship added||related to 0004266|
|2009-06-05 15:59||pjuvara||Note Edited: 0017030|
|2009-06-05 16:02||rmorley||Issue Monitored: rmorley|
|2009-06-05 18:17||DavidV||Note Added: 0017049|
|2009-06-08 08:56||psarobe||Note Added: 0017067|
|2009-06-08 08:56||psarobe||Status||new => feedback|
|2009-06-08 08:56||psarobe||Note Added: 0017068|
|2009-06-08 19:32||pjuvara||Note Added: 0017116|
|2009-06-08 19:32||pjuvara||Status||feedback => new|
|2009-06-11 00:58||eduardo_Argal||Note Added: 0017201|
|2009-06-22 09:57||rafaroda||Status||new => closed|
|2009-06-22 09:57||rafaroda||Note Added: 0017503|
|2009-06-22 09:57||rafaroda||Resolution||open => duplicate|
|2009-06-23 00:00||anonymous||sf_bug_id||0 => 2810573|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2009 MantisBT Group|