Uploaded image for project: 'OFBiz'
  1. OFBiz
  2. OFBIZ-5373

If received quantity is greater then ordered quantity then order item quantity update but order item shipgroup assoc quantity does not updated.

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Minor
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: Release Branch 11.04, Release Branch 12.04, Release Branch 13.07, Trunk
    • Fix Version/s: 14.12.01, 12.04.06, 13.07.02, 16.11.01
    • Component/s: order
    • Labels:
      None
    • Sprint:
      Bug Crush Event - 21/2/2015

      Description

      If received quantity is greater then ordered quantity then updateIssuanceShipmentAndPoOnReceiveInventory(ShipmentReceiptServices.xml) service update only ordered quantity and it does not update the orderItemShipGroupAssoc quantity.
      Due to this createAsNewOrder and update order item functionality will be affected.

      Steps to regenerate:

      • Create a PO with at least two item.
      • Receive first item and received quantity should be greater then ordered quantity.
      • Now excess quantity will update on order item quantity and item will be completed but shipgroupassoc quantity still old one.
      • Now update the order.
      • Completed order item quantity will be messed
      1. OFbiz-5373.patch
        2 kB
        Rishi Solanki

        Activity

        Hide
        rishisolankii Rishi Solanki added a comment -

        Here is the patch which fixes the flow problem reported in the issue. Patch contains the fix in a way when order item update in the service 'updateIssuanceShipmentAndPoOnReceiveInventory' will also change the OrderItemShipGroupAssoc.
        Also handle the scenario if there are multiple OrderItemShipGroupAssoc records wrt an order item.

        Show
        rishisolankii Rishi Solanki added a comment - Here is the patch which fixes the flow problem reported in the issue. Patch contains the fix in a way when order item update in the service 'updateIssuanceShipmentAndPoOnReceiveInventory' will also change the OrderItemShipGroupAssoc. Also handle the scenario if there are multiple OrderItemShipGroupAssoc records wrt an order item.
        Hide
        rishisolankii Rishi Solanki added a comment -

        Alternative to solution provided, I think the flow implemented when received quantity is greater than ordered quantity, we may need to think of weather the flow is correct or not. May be better way first user will edit the order and after that receive the purchase order item with increased quantity. I mean to say no need to give received quantity text box to allow more than quantity order and remove the flow of copying the received quantity into order item quantity where this issue reported.

        This is just an thought requires discussion. Soon will start discussion on mailing list so that if we can change the flow or not. For now recommending to fix the existing flow with the provided patch and fix as the issue type is BUG.

        Show
        rishisolankii Rishi Solanki added a comment - Alternative to solution provided, I think the flow implemented when received quantity is greater than ordered quantity, we may need to think of weather the flow is correct or not. May be better way first user will edit the order and after that receive the purchase order item with increased quantity. I mean to say no need to give received quantity text box to allow more than quantity order and remove the flow of copying the received quantity into order item quantity where this issue reported. This is just an thought requires discussion. Soon will start discussion on mailing list so that if we can change the flow or not. For now recommending to fix the existing flow with the provided patch and fix as the issue type is BUG.
        Hide
        arunpati Arun Patidar added a comment -

        I have verified the attached patch and its working as expected. We can commit this patch for now till we discuss and define new process flow.

        Show
        arunpati Arun Patidar added a comment - I have verified the attached patch and its working as expected. We can commit this patch for now till we discuss and define new process flow.
        Hide
        pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

        Are we considering the right business functionality? Are we going to update the order, when more is delivered than ordered?

        We can not ascertain whether that was the intend (without more details regarding the order and/or agreement), so we must be very cautious here. Basically (and legally) only that what has been ordered is allowed to be delivered. Any shortage and excess must be resolved between the parties in another process.

        Show
        pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - Are we considering the right business functionality? Are we going to update the order, when more is delivered than ordered? We can not ascertain whether that was the intend (without more details regarding the order and/or agreement), so we must be very cautious here. Basically (and legally) only that what has been ordered is allowed to be delivered. Any shortage and excess must be resolved between the parties in another process.
        Hide
        arunpati Arun Patidar added a comment -

        Hi Pierre Smits

        We are not considering order update here. I just provided patch for fixing bug in existing work flow. Introducing of new work flow will require more design level discussions. So I think we should good with fix in current work flow for now.

        Show
        arunpati Arun Patidar added a comment - Hi Pierre Smits We are not considering order update here. I just provided patch for fixing bug in existing work flow. Introducing of new work flow will require more design level discussions. So I think we should good with fix in current work flow for now.
        Hide
        toashishvijay Ashish Vijaywargiya added a comment -

        Thanks Deepak for creating the issue, Thanks Rishi for providing the patch and thanks Arun for verification. Changes are committed in trunk(r1661350), R14.12(r1661351), R13.07(r1661353), R12.04(r1661354).

        Show
        toashishvijay Ashish Vijaywargiya added a comment - Thanks Deepak for creating the issue, Thanks Rishi for providing the patch and thanks Arun for verification. Changes are committed in trunk(r1661350), R14.12(r1661351), R13.07(r1661353), R12.04(r1661354).
        Hide
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

        Please Ashish remember you fix the upcoming branch not the trunk which is never released. I did some for you already this morning...

        Show
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Please Ashish remember you fix the upcoming branch not the trunk which is never released. I did some for you already this morning...
        Hide
        toashishvijay Ashish Vijaywargiya added a comment -

        Thanks Jacques for your comment, I will be extra careful from next time.


        Ashish

        Show
        toashishvijay Ashish Vijaywargiya added a comment - Thanks Jacques for your comment, I will be extra careful from next time. – Ashish

          People

          • Assignee:
            toashishvijay Ashish Vijaywargiya
            Reporter:
            deepak.dixit Deepak Dixit
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            5 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development

                Agile