Product vs Variant

[Peter Müller]

Hi all,

I don't get the point with that product / variant thing.

Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I want only a product record with a product code.

Any doc that explains this feature. Thank you !

[Artem Braga]

воскресенье, 5 марта 2017 г., 19:55:05 UTC+2 пользователь Peter Müller написал:

Hello. 

By default,each Product.Template creates one Product.Variant. Product.Variant instance is used in all transactions and operations (e.g. - you store in your warehouse Product.Variant, not Product.Template). Product.Variant can have different attributes.

Hope that helps. There are plenty of discussions on this subject in this forum. 

Artem 

 

[E. Boer]

On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:

Hi all,

I don't get the point with that product / variant thing.

Me too, it's the most ridiculous and confusing thing in Tryton.  A lot of people hate me because of this. So I'm thinking to propose a redesign of the whole product / template / variant thing. But only after two months because I don't have time for it right now. I have already done some research for a possible solution. The basic idea is to move all the fields from template to product and that the template is "just" a template with filled in data. When you create a new product and add the template, values from the template will be filled in, but you then can edit them, without touching the template.

 

Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I want only a product record with a product code.

Me too, now you have two forms to fill in the data, which is confusing.
 

[Dominique Chabord]

2017-03-06 11:20 GMT+01:00 E. Boer <edbo....@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I don't get the point with that product / variant thing.
>>
>

> The basic idea is to move all the fields from template to
> product and that the template is "just" a template with filled in data.
>
>

You may propose a discussion about this. At first seems very confusing
if you re-use the same words for something different. A template is a
template and should be used as such, "just a template" is yet to be
defined, and "data filled in a template" is probably a strange beast
;-).
how will you manage variants with your enhanced design ?

>>
>> Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I want
>> only a product record with a product code.
>
>
> Me too, now you have two forms to fill in the data, which is confusing.

Heard it has been improved recently. Check
>

[Cédric Krier]

On 2017-03-06 02:20, E. Boer wrote:
> On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:
> So I'm thinking to propose a redesign of
> the whole product / template / variant thing. But only after two months
> because I don't have time for it right now. I have already done some
> research for a possible solution. The basic idea is to move all the fields
> from template to product and that the template is "just" a template with
> filled in data. When you create a new product and add the template, values
> from the template will be filled in, but you then can edit them, without
> touching the template.
>

This will remove the feature to update all the variants by just updating
common field on the template.
The current design is what it is to allow customization of what is
shared between variant and what is not.

> > Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I want
> > only a product record with a product code.
> >
>
> Me too, now you have two forms to fill in the data, which is confusing.

No, we carefully designed the template form to be just enough to create
product.

--
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

[Axel Braun]

Indeed. 90% of the users do not need product variants, but they have to deal
with the complexity.

Most other systems go the other way round: A product is a product, and
variants can be added if required.

I wonder if this is possible in Tryton with its object oriented design.
Something like a product_variant module that keeps variants, whilt the
standard product modules offers what most users need.

My 2c
Axel

[Sasa Ostrouska]

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Axel Braun <axel....@gmx.de> wrote:

Am Montag, 6. März 2017, 02:20:44 CET schrieb E. Boer:
> On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:

> > Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I want
> > only a product record with a product code.
>
> Me too, now you have two forms to fill in the data, which is confusing.

Indeed. 90% of the users do not need product variants, but they have to deal
with the complexity.

Most other systems go the other way round: A product is a product, and
variants can be added if required.

Sorry, but isnt a product one thing or item and a variant of that product is another product or another item in any case.

Or what is this really used for ?

Rgds

Saxa

 

I wonder if this is possible in Tryton with its object oriented design.
Something like a product_variant module that keeps variants, whilt the
standard product modules offers what most users need.

My 2c

Axel

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tryton" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/5837319.tmfLs8QYhh%40t520.axxite.internal.

[E. Boer]

On Monday, 6 March 2017 11:48:57 UTC+1, Dominique Chabord wrote:

2017-03-06 11:20 GMT+01:00 E. Boer <edbo....@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I don't get the point with that product / variant thing.
>>
>
>  The basic idea is to move all the fields from template to
> product and that the template is "just" a template with filled in data.
>
>

You may propose a discussion about this. At first seems very confusing
if you re-use the same words for something different. A template is a
template and should be used as such, "just a template" is yet to be
defined, and "data filled in a template" is probably a strange beast
;-).
how will you manage variants with your enhanced design ?

 
it's not confusing, the words are right, but the implementation is not. In my proposal, all the product-fields are in product.product. When you create a template, you enter a name for the template, add some fields from the product.product and enter different values to it. That's all. Creating a product, you select the template and it will add the values to the product.

[E. Boer]

On Monday, 6 March 2017 11:55:06 UTC+1, Cédric Krier wrote:

On 2017-03-06 02:20, E. Boer wrote:
> On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:
> So I'm thinking to propose a redesign of
> the whole product / template / variant thing. But only after two months
> because I don't have time for it right now. I have already done some
> research for a possible solution. The basic idea is to move all the fields
> from template to product and that the template is "just" a template with
> filled in data. When you create a new product and add the template, values
> from the template will be filled in, but you then can edit them, without
> touching the template.
>

This will remove the feature to update all the variants by just updating
common field on the template.
The current design is what it is to allow customization of what is
shared between variant and what is not.

You can easily add an boolean to the template-field to lock it.

 

> > Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I want
> > only a product record with a product code.
> >
>
> Me too, now you have two forms to fill in the data, which is confusing.

No, we carefully designed the template form to be just enough to create
product.

It's strange ... in whole Tryton the variant is used, but users have to create a template in order to create a variant. Of course you can create a variant directly with a existing template, but then you are confused because the prices are on the template and not on the variant.
 

[Dominique Chabord]

2017-03-06 13:33 GMT+01:00 E. Boer <edbo....@gmail.com>:

>
> it's not confusing, the words are right, but the implementation is not. In
> my proposal, all the product-fields are in product.product. When you create
> a template, you enter a name for the template, add some fields from the
> product.product and enter different values to it. That's all. Creating a
> product, you select the template and it will add the values to the product.

So how will it be different from the crrent ?

[Cédric Krier]

On 2017-03-06 04:38, E. Boer wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, 6 March 2017 11:55:06 UTC+1, Cédric Krier wrote:
> >
> > On 2017-03-06 02:20, E. Boer wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:55:05 UTC+1, Peter Müller wrote:
> > > So I'm thinking to propose a redesign of
> > > the whole product / template / variant thing. But only after two months
> > > because I don't have time for it right now. I have already done some
> > > research for a possible solution. The basic idea is to move all the
> > fields
> > > from template to product and that the template is "just" a template with
> > > filled in data. When you create a new product and add the template,
> > values
> > > from the template will be filled in, but you then can edit them, without
> > > touching the template.
> > >
> >
> > This will remove the feature to update all the variants by just updating
> > common field on the template.
> > The current design is what it is to allow customization of what is
> > shared between variant and what is not.
> >
>
> You can easily add an boolean to the template-field to lock it.

But it is precisely the opposite that is wanted. The template should
manage the value of the variant.

> > > > Probably it is not my use case, I don't have T-Shirts for sale ... I
> > want
> > > > only a product record with a product code.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Me too, now you have two forms to fill in the data, which is confusing.
> >
> > No, we carefully designed the template form to be just enough to create
> > product.
> >
>
> It's strange ... in whole Tryton the variant is used, but users have to
> create a template in order to create a variant.

Why is it strange. It is logical that you use the real thing when
performing transactions. And that you refer to template when creating
it.

> Of course you can create a
> variant directly with a existing template, but then you are confused
> because the prices are on the template and not on the variant.

Why is it confusing?
It is designed this way because it is easy if you need to move the price
from template to variant but the opposite is not possible.

[E. Boer]

Current design: You create a new variant, add a template -> you CANNOT change e.g. listprice or costprice or add an extra category. Those are all defined on the template

Proposed design: You create a new variant, add a template -> you CAN change listprice or costprice or whatever.

In the current design a template is required, in proposed design a template is optional. When you want to use templates, you can, but it's not necessary. See it as templates in office or other programs. It's a base you can start with, but you can change everything. And as I said earlier, you can lock fields on the template to not be editable in the variant.

How the implementation will be? I don't know yet. It's just singing around in my head. But the very basic idea is:
- All fields in one database table
- Decouple templates from variants, variants do not require a template anymore, eventually it should be possible to drop templates and move them to a new module
- Variants become products which are used throughout the system (which is the case now already)
- Template become like an attribute-set with pre-filled variant (product) fields and a boolean to lock the field from editing as attributes (one2many?) (you almost get the current situation back)