Re: [gnue-sb-discuss] General Ledger and Accounts Payable

[Jason Cater]

This was good to see.  It refreshed my memory on a few items and
reminded me of some stuff I hadn't added yet.  For example, I have
ap_invoices, but no ap_invoice_details.  It is important to be able to
split apart a payables invoice as some items on an invoice may be coded
to different G/L accounts.  

One thing I do wonder about is that nola and descendants have a company,
ar_company, and ap_company.  I wonder what's the use of separate company
tables for each "module"?  I don't see a need for that myself; perhaps
others can enlighten me. 

Also, I don't really think it's appropriate to group Mike's
purchaseorder and my ap_invoice tables together as the same thing.  They
really are not.  But they are complementary and would work together. I
had not addressed a Purchase Order system yet as that's one of those "I
would really like one" and not a "that is a critical feature that I must
have today."

I also noticed one major difference between my schema and others is I
have balance tables. What are other people's feelings on this?  At first
glance, some might say that this goes against proper normalization,
which I believe in trying to adhere to.  However, one feature we've seen
in other proprietary packages is, after a few years, you can "archive"
old
transaction information, but keep the balance information in place for
reporting purposes.  Keeping a balance table would also be a performance
boon. 

-- Jason 

On 26 Mar 2003 00:22:35 -0700
Derek Neighbors <address@hidden> wrote:

> Jason,
> 
> On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 21:38, Jason Cater wrote:
> > Greetings, 
> > 
> > I'd like to kick off the discussions on GNUe/SB's General Ledger
> > and Accounts Payables modules. I have attached my notes from the
> 
> Based on the discussions you, myself and Mike had on IRC tonight, I
> took the first step.
> 
> I took the table listings from ARIA (NOLA FORK), AccLite (NOLA FORK),
> Jason Cater NCS 2000 mockup, GNUe SB CVS, Louis' GNUe Accounting
> Proposal and Assorted Table listings from Mike to this list, and I
> tried to line them up for comparison purposes.  Basically I didnt do
> field by field, but I looked at the definitions during comparison so I
> can comment on differences.  
> 
> In some instances you might see one table compared to multiples this
> usually is because one of the sources has "expanded" the concept into
> multiple tables that was a single table in another source.
> 
> I have posted in postscript, pdf and open office calc format here:
> http://www.gnuenterprise.org/~dneighbo/table_comparison.ps
> http://www.gnuenterprise.org/~dneighbo/table_comparison.pdf
> http://www.gnuenterprise.org/~dneighbo/table_comparison.sxc
> 
> Perhaps tomorrow we can discuss the results and do some moving.  I
> suspect as this takes a higher priority I should update the roadmaps
> to show that its moving.  I also need to punch out item management so
> Mike can get some price lists printed and buy you for report features!
> ;)
> 
> -- 
> Derek Neighbors
> GNU Enterprise
> http://www.gnuenterprise.org
> address@hidden
> 
> Was I helpful?  Let others know:
>  http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=dneighbo
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNUe-SB-Discuss mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnue-sb-discuss
>