Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: pending payments to reconcile #38091

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

rtdany10
Copy link
Contributor

@rtdany10 rtdany10 commented Nov 14, 2023

Report to get list of parties for whom reconciliation is required.

image


Depends on #38220

@github-actions github-actions bot added the needs-tests This PR needs automated unit-tests. label Nov 14, 2023
@rtdany10 rtdany10 force-pushed the pending-reconciliation branch from 448edce to c739327 Compare November 14, 2023 10:59
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 21 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (c31ee8e) 67.39% compared to head (c739327) 67.38%.
Report is 432 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop   #38091      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    67.39%   67.38%   -0.02%     
===========================================
  Files          757      758       +1     
  Lines        60449    60463      +14     
===========================================
+ Hits         40737    40740       +3     
- Misses       19712    19723      +11     
Files Coverage Δ
erpnext/controllers/buying_controller.py 83.94% <ø> (ø)
...cturing/doctype/production_plan/production_plan.py 84.38% <ø> (ø)
...production_plan_summary/production_plan_summary.py 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...serial_and_batch_bundle/serial_and_batch_bundle.py 73.15% <100.00%> (+0.06%) ⬆️
...e/subcontracting_receipt/subcontracting_receipt.py 89.53% <ø> (ø)
...ion_deletion_record/transaction_deletion_record.py 88.97% <86.95%> (ø)
erpnext/setup/doctype/employee/employee.py 59.16% <75.00%> (ø)
...ents_to_reconcile/pending_payments_to_reconcile.py 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

@rtdany10
Copy link
Contributor Author

get_partywise_advanced_payment_amount shows wrong value for POS invoices.
Ref: #38130

Since this PR also uses the same function. I'm moving it to draft

@rtdany10 rtdany10 marked this pull request as draft November 16, 2023 11:09
@rtdany10
Copy link
Contributor Author

Depends on #38220

@rtdany10 rtdany10 marked this pull request as ready for review November 20, 2023 11:12
@ruthra-kumar
Copy link
Member

@rtdany10

Can't the same information be obtained from Accounts Receivable report?

@rtdany10
Copy link
Contributor Author

rtdany10 commented Dec 4, 2023

@rtdany10

Can't the same information be obtained from Accounts Receivable report?

Yes, can be done, but not when you have 1000s of customers. AR is a heavy report.

@dj12djdjs
Copy link
Collaborator

My understanding this report is Accounts Receivable Summary with a filter Advance Amount > 0. I think that since this is a pretty simple report, and the data is already available in the existing accounting report(s) (Accounts Receivable, and Accounts Receivable Summary) this report is better for a customer customization's app.

Currently, it would be easy for the operator to switch between summarized advanced payments, and detailed advanced payments just by switching between Accounts Receivable, and Accounts Receivable Summary
image
image

This is just my thoughts, granted I've not delt with customer(s) dealing with thousands of active AR accounts.

@rtdany10
Copy link
Contributor Author

rtdany10 commented Dec 9, 2023

AR Summary is a heavy report with a lot of computation. Generating that for just checking advance doesn't seem very logical.

this report is better for a customer customization's app.

Currently its done as such, but I felt this would be a nice addition for bigger organizations with a lot of customers. Especially when FC works by limiting total computation per day.

Copy link

stale bot commented Dec 24, 2023

This pull request has been automatically marked as inactive because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed within 3 days if no further activity occurs, but it only takes a comment to keep a contribution alive :) Also, even if it is closed, you can always reopen the PR when you're ready. Thank you for contributing.

@stale stale bot added the inactive label Dec 24, 2023
@stale stale bot closed this Dec 30, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 14, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
inactive needs-tests This PR needs automated unit-tests.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants