banking-addons-drivers team mailing list archive

[Alexis de Lattre <alexis@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Le 21/02/2014 11:00, Alexis de Lattre a écrit :
> 1) the name of the module : I propose "account_partner_payment"
>
> 2) the dependancies : this module would only depend on the module 
> account_payment from the official addons
>
> 3) the datamodel : here are the additionnal fields that would be 
> provided by that module :
> - 2 field.property : customer_payment_mode and supplier_payment_mode, 
> which would be a many2one to payment.mode (in 
> account_payment_extension, the field points to payment.type, but I 
> find this strange, no ?)
> - 1 field on account.invoice : payment_mode_id, which would be a 
> many2one to payment.mode (again, in account_payment_extension, the 
> field points to payment.type !)
>
> 4) then, we would need to have a way to filter on the payment mode of 
> the invoice when we select the invoices to pay. Does that mean that 
> "account_banking_payment_export" would declare a dependancy on 
> "account_partner_payment" ?

I started the implementation... that's the best way to fine-tune the ideas !

In fact, account_payment_extension comes with 2 other modules : 
sale_payment (depends on sale + account_payment_extension) and 
purchase_payment (depends on purchase + account_payment_extension). 
These 2 modules copy payment mode/type and bank account from partner to 
sale/purchase.order, and then copy it to the invoice. I think we also 
need that. So I'll add 2 other modules :
- account_payment_sale
- account_payment_purchase
(the initial one would probably be renamed "account_payment_partner", to 
keep the naming logic)

About point 3) in my first mail, I initially proposed to have the 
many2one fields point to payment.mode instead of payment.type. I think I 
understand why account_payment_extension points to payment.type : if you 
consider that your company has 2 bank accounts A and B : they sometimes 
pay their suppliers from account A, sometimes from account B, depending 
on the situation of each bank account. As they have 2 bank accounts, 
they have 2 payment modes for wire transfer... but they could share the 
same account type "wire transfer". In this case, we would prefer to have 
the many2one fields point to account.type, so that it is independant 
from the bank account that will be used for the payment.
Note : if the 2 banks use 2 different versions of SEPA PAIN, then we'll 
have 2 different payment types... bad luck ! But maybe we could change 
that in the future and have 1 payment type for "pain.001.001.xx" and 
store the xx on the payment.mode.

So, to conclude on point 3), I think it's better if we point to 
payment.type (and NOT payment.mode).

--
Alexis de Lattre