openerp-expert-framework team mailing list archive

[Cloves Almeida <cjalmeida@xxxxxxxxx>]

IMO, the answer to this "navigation" issue is really close to answering 
"what business process this object is part of?" If we don't have a 
business process definition, we will always have an incomplete answer.

For instance, imagine a simple B2B selling process: "Encode SO (draft) 
-> Approve credit -> Confirm SO -> Picking -> Invoicing -> Payment". 
Linking SO/Picking/Invoice would be incomplete, clearly the users would 
want to be able to navigate through  the custom "Credit Evaluation" and 
"Payment". If it involves manufacturing, the related production orders 
are also relevant. Not only navigation, but listing state, reference, 
user responsible, etc.

Yes, I'm talking about business process management. Sounds complicated 
but we're almost there with our workflow engine. We only have to improve 
a few concepts and, more importantly, make it very easy to 
build/change/use by making its user interface and API simple and 
consistent. For example, all objects that are process "documents" should 
have a standard "Show process" tab/right panel button/wizard that would 
list every "document" created during the process. Every user would have 
a "Task List" form that would list what is pending in every process.

Maybe it's an effort for the 6.0 release of more, but being process 
oriented and having an excellent BPM engine integrated would really set 
OpenERP apart.

Albert Cervera i Areny escreveu:
> A Dimecres, 16 de desembre de 2009, Raphaël Valyi va escriure:
>   
> > Finally this doesn't address the point about the specific links we speak
> > about being somewhat redundant with the history tabs of the sale order
> > lines. Any though about those points?
> >
> >     
>
> What we did in Koo is that using Ctrl it's possible to open related records 
> (many2one, one2many, many2many and relate) in another tab instead of a new 
> window. I think that solves many cases. The main problem is that in some cases 
> (invoice for example) it doesn't open the appropiate form view (for example) 
> but we've got some ideas to solve that. This allows integrators to choose 
> which relations they want to show as fields, and which they leave as toolbar 
> buttons.
>
> Not sure that solves your concerns.
>
>