Contributors mailing list archives
Re: Best model for selling unique products (used machines)by
to contribute to this very interesting discussion:
we have encountered this situation (unique products) and decided to use products (product.template/product) vs lot (stock.production.lot), because of the stock valuation.
if you use the perpetual inventory, all the lots share the same cost (average or FIFO), which is a big problem as unique products have unique cost, and selecting a specific serial number does not change the cost sequence (FIFO).
Just for this reason, we decided to use products.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 at 05:06, Frederik Kramer <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Hi Graeme, Peter and me had a intense discussion on the matter today again. Probably none of the solutions (purely thought) is really it. We deal with instances of technical machinery (agricultural machinery to be precise). Almost always there is a base product but then there is a set of attributes (each of which may be boolean, text, integer sometimes in a configurable list). So its much like the use case in e- Commerce (hat odoo-pim and Akretion adressed). However, each of these instances also has a unique serial number at a certain point. This serial number (just like a car) is the unique identifier with which the concrete machine is recognizable not only by our customer but also by the manufacturer and diverse other organisations (including the state). So theoretically its valid to extend stock.production.lot or product.product to store the additional information there. We were almost changing our minds from the inital solution (stock.production.lot) to product.product but that the fact that we really have trouble having a clean UI for spare parts (w/o) serial number and without massive attribute sets renders this solution cumbersome. So we no probably go for extending product.product with an addtional and specific model that is just beeing used and filled if the concrete product is a machinery and not for intance a nut or a nail or whatever. Certainly this also comes with drawbacks but probaly less then extending either of the aforemetioned models directly. Best Frederik Am Mittwoch, den 26.08.2020, 20:42 +0000 schrieb Graeme Gellatly: > Your main issue is this. > > If I sell lots of the same product in different states with a > reasonably high inventory turnover - then I'd use lots. The reason > is, plenty can go wrong using products, like imagine the work in > activating, deactivating, creating a new product each time, > stocktakes and maintenance. You end up with 100's of items with very > similar descriptions, some are in stock some aren't. If a user picks > the wrong one, it actually sucks changing everything like the sale, > picking etc, whereas for lots it is generally easily editable. > > If I sell few products or always different makes/models, then using > product, deaactivating and all the other work on the item list > maintenance side might be worth it and easier than the work in > maintaining lots. You just duplicate, update description etc and > hope noone makes a mistake with accounts, categories, duplicate > references etc. > > To me lots are completely natural, as a lot is a specific > identifiable instance of a product, but if you are treating products > as essentially the lot anyway then there is no point. > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:12 PM Peter Hahn <email@example.com> > wrote: > > Dear all, thanks for all the input. > > > > Am 26.08.20 um 09:52 schrieb Roussel, Denis: > > > > > > > From my point of view and from near experience of customer of > > ours, we advise as some said to not change too much the Odoo base > > objects purpose as, along project life, you'll need to twist all > > the Odoo flows to adapt to your changes. > > > > That’s interesting, because that’s the main thing I am thinking > > about: > > Which approach will break the most/need the most customization? > > > > What flows do you think of exactly? > > > > In my use case I only intend to add informative information to the > > products, so my current impression is, that using products will > > give me > > all the flows I need out of the box, while `stock.production.lot` > > will > > be at least a bit cumbersome in the UI for users and need > > customizations > > to make it work as expected for the user. (E.g. I think one would > > expect > > the sold machine (lot) named on the invoice) > > > > > > > > > As Graeme said, the lots are the good place to extend > > modelization for one product instance. > > Ok. This seams to be somewhat common sence among the list. > > > > > > Ok. I think I don’t need to bother you anymore but just make a > > decision. > > > > So to get to more concrete question: > > What could be possibly go wrong using product.product? > > What do you expect to break? > > > > The only thing I can think off that would be strange is, if they > > one day > > decide to sell something completly different things too. Than all > > the > > machine specific information won’t make much sense. > > _______________________________________________ > > Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15 > > Post to: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > > Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15 > Post to: mailto:email@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe -- Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer Geschäftsführer initOS GmbH An der Eisenbahn 1 21224 Rosengarten Phone: +49 4105 56156-12 Fax: +49 4105 56156-10 Mobil: +49 179 3901819 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Web: www.initos.com Geschäftsführung: Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke Sitz der Gesellschaft: Rosengarten – Klecken Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226 Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247 USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
InitOS GmbH, Pete Hahn