account_statement import modules

[edbo....@gmail.com]

I'm just wondering. We took the account_statement_coda module to build the account_statement_mt940 module. The module just import the statement and creates the origins, but there are no lines created. So we still have to manually add the statement lines?

We have now an almost working module for importing mt940 statements (except creating / filling a dict with the information). Because we want minimal work, we have also extended the import wizard with a default payable and receivable account and the statement lines are also created and linked to the origin.

So we can do two things:
- Keep this module as it works perfectly for us
- Split the module into a basic version as the other ones and create our own to add the extra functionality. The basic version can then be added to the set of default modules if wanted. But as not being a full-time developer, but it's rather a hobby, I have no experience with testing, or creating installable new python-packages etc. If anybody can help me out here with some extra explanation of http://www.tryton.org/how-to-contribute.html would be very welcome.

[Sergi Almacellas Abellana]

El 10/04/18 a les 22:08, edbo....@gmail.com ha escrit:

> I'm just wondering. We took the account_statement_coda module to build the account_statement_mt940 module. The module just import the statement and creates the origins, but there are no lines created. So we still have to manually add the statement lines?

Yes, the idea is that the fil imports the bank lines as direct relation
with origins and then the user reviews them to select which
account/party and invoices (if any) are related to the statement.

>
> We have now an almost working module for importing mt940 statements (except creating / filling a dict with the information). Because we want minimal work, we have also extended the import wizard with a default payable and receivable account and the statement lines are also created and linked to the origin.


>
> So we can do two things:
> - Keep this module as it works perfectly for us
> - Split the module into a basic version as the other ones and create our own to add the extra functionality.

This will be the good way to benefit the project.

Maybe you can propose another discussion explaining why you use the
extra fuctionality to see if we can find a generic solution that works
for most people.

The basic version can then be added to the set of default modules if
wanted.

That will be great.

But as not being a full-time developer, but it's rather a hobby, I have
no experience with testing, or creating installable new python-packages
etc. If anybody can help me out here with some extra explanation of
http://www.tryton.org/how-to-contribute.html would be very welcome.

I will be happy to help if you have doubts. Just ping me (pokoli) on IRC
and lets talk about it.

If you have not contributed any patch to tryton probably it's better to
pick an easy issue first to get familiar with the process. Here is the
list of easy issues:

https://bugs.tryton.org/issue?status=-1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7&@sort=-activity&@search_text=&@columns=id,activity,component,title,assignedto,status&@dispname=Show%20Easy&keyword=27&@group=priority&@filter=status,keyword&@pagesize=50&@startwith=0


--
Sergi Almacellas Abellana
www.koolpi.com
Twitter: @pokoli_srk

[edbo....@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, 11 April 2018 12:37:53 UTC+2, Sergi Almacellas Abellana wrote:
>
> Maybe you can propose another discussion explaining why you use the
> extra fuctionality to see if we can find a generic solution that works
> for most people.

Should I use discuss for that? I think it's better reading then email.

> If you have not contributed any patch to tryton probably it's better to
> pick an easy issue first to get familiar with the process. Here is the
> list of easy issues:
>
> https://bugs.tryton.org/issue?status=-1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7&@sort=-activity&@search_text=&@columns=id,activity,component,title,assignedto,status&@dispname=Show%20Easy&keyword=27&@group=priority&@filter=status,keyword&@pagesize=50&@startwith=0

Ah, ok there are some very easy issues. I will try some to get familiar with the process.

[Sergi Almacellas Abellana]

El 11/04/18 a les 22:51, edbo....@gmail.com ha escrit:

> On Wednesday, 11 April 2018 12:37:53 UTC+2, Sergi Almacellas Abellana wrote:
>> Maybe you can propose another discussion explaining why you use the
>> extra fuctionality to see if we can find a generic solution that works
>> for most people.
> Should I use discuss for that? I think it's better reading then email.
>
>

Yes, feel free to open a new feature on discuss.