Work Order Subcontracting

[HKuz]

DRAFT Addresses #2

Updated to-dos:

• Two new WO validations:

  • [x] skip_transfer can't be checked if there are subcontracted items/sub-assemblies present
  • [x] confirm that the BOMs for subcontracted items/sub-assemblies do not have operations

• [x] As settings dictate, remove the v14 item filter for when a PO/PI is subcontracted it only allows service items in the Items table dropdown -> details in issue #14

• [x] add necessary fields to Stock Entry Detail to track paid qty, show Total Qty, Paid Qty, and To Pay Qty fields in the Subcontracting table in the PI as the source of truth for reconciliation

• tie WOs to POs:

  • [x] Production plan and PP item row data is automatically saved into a subcontracted WO when it's generated via the Create WO/Subcontracted PO button
  • [x] Create PO from WO - generate a subcontracting PO directly from a WO. (move previous pull request code to a button vs on submit, same pattern as in Production Plan)
  • [x] Have button functionality in WO to add to an existing PO (cancel/amend that PO to include new WO, too)
  • [x] Be able to link multiple WOs to one PO (done via a new child table)

• When a WO is cancelled, update the PO (this works if PO is draft, but if PO is submitted, ERPNext detects linked docs and user can only cancel PO then manually amend, vs doing this programmatically)

  • [x] remove WO row from subcontracting table, update fg_item_qty and item qty's in Items table

• Purchase Invoice

  • [x] SQL query to collect stock entries (and item details) with WO, PO, qty info for reconciliation
  • [x] add to validate that to_pay columns can't be higher than (total qty - already paid for qty)
  • [x] on submit, update stock entry detail to track qty invoiced in paid_qty field
  • [x] on cancel, update stock entry detail to remove qty paid for in invoice from paid_qty field

• [x] The visibility of subcontracting info table in PO and PI is based on the is_subcontracted check box and the inventory tools settings options

• [ ] Print/email format in workflow to notify subcontractor materials are ready

• [ ] Add test data for this workflow (subcontracted WOs, material txfr SEs, multiple manufacture SE receiving subcontracted goods)

• Process refinements to discuss:

  • How to use the new PO child table that track any linked WOs. (Currently it's not being used in the PI to get o/s stock entries. There is code in the query but it's commented out - it would add conditions to limit SE's 1) attached to a WO linked to the POs and 2) for received items matching the 'finished good' to what's in the PO items' finished goods field. Using that code would somewhat 'require' the users to have all WOs accounted for in the PO)
  • (DONE) how to update the items table in PO when a WO is added/canceled (if at all). There are required fields for the finished good (aka Pie Crusts) and its qty (fg_item and fg_item_qty). As of now, the code cancels/amends the doc to add a new blank item with those fields filled in based on the WO info, then lets the user adjust anything else and re-submit.

• Valuation comment: we discussed that accurate valuation would be an issue to tackle. For now, I included a valuation rate in Pie Crust item master (so the receiving stock entries wouldn't complain) equal to the value of the raw materials. This is static / not sensitive to timing of rate updates, and doesn't capture the subcontracted value-add (we talked about using an LCV-esque approach for this). Let me know if we should set up the test data differently / accept zero valuation rate in the SE / something else.

[HKuz]

@agritheory - I know you're traveling, whenever suits your timing, this is in a state where a demo/discussion to get feedback makes sense.

[HKuz]

Status update: Comments are resolved - I created two BOMs and revised the test data with a few tweaks (and tested that the site re-installs without issue). The UOM conversions from one commit were moved into the Item UOM Conversion Detail table instead. To test this, I created two Pie Crust Service items - one in stock UOMs of Nos, the other in Hours and checked that adjustments to quantities were using the right UOM when WOs were adding or removing finished good qtys.

One head's up, I had to manually adjust the columns in the Subcontracting table on the Purchase Invoice to see all the necessary columns (the Paid_Qty and To_Pay_Qty fields weren't showing automatically).

There are a handful of potential UI refinements that are still outstanding (also noted in code):

• (PO/PI) the system assumes the subcontracted finished good qty is in the same units as the item 'purchased' itself, and auto-adjusts it when the Item qty changes. In the case the item is in Hours, it incorrectly changes things. Override this to check for UOM / do proper conversions?
• (PO) If the user adds a row manually to the Subcontracting table and fills in the WO field, would be nice to autofill the other fields so they don't have to type them in (as of now, the system expects this to be done via a button on the WO)
• (PO) when the user removes a row in the Subcontracting table, would be nice to adjust the quantities in the Items table (would need server side help to do UOM conversion check)

[agritheory]

One head's up, I had to manually adjust the columns in the Subcontracting table on the Purchase Invoice to see all the necessary columns (the Paid_Qty and To_Pay_Qty fields weren't showing automatically).

What does "manually adjust" mean?

[HKuz]

@agritheory - manually adjust means I had to click the wheel icon at the side of the table, and tick off those fields to include them (then adjust the widths so everything would fit)

[agritheory]

manually adjust means I had to click the wheel icon at the side of the table, and tick off those fields to include them (then adjust the widths so everything would fit)

@hkuz I added some JS to handle this as well as some changes to the workflow. I've been testing by creating a PO from the Work Order; it seem to go according to plan. Can you give this some testing to see how if works for you? Please do a reinstall and setup to pick up some new details

[HKuz]

@agritheory - new functionality looks good! I removed a couple text artifacts that threw errors. Also, when a new subcontracting PO was created off a WO, I was getting an error that the Item had to be a non-stock one, then couldn't be None. To get around these, I commented out the line that adds the item_code field (so Item will be blank for User to fill in) and put the doc's 'ignore_validate' and 'ignore_mandatory' flags to true. When the filter in subcontracted POs that forces only service items is removed, we should be able to revert the changes I made.

[agritheory]

To get around these, I commented out the line that adds the item_code field (so Item will be blank for User to fill in) and put the doc's 'ignore_validate' and 'ignore_mandatory' flags to true. When the filter in subcontracted POs that forces only service items is removed, we should be able to revert the changes I made.

I think we should consider the fix for #14 as well as a server-side validation in scope of this PR.

Edit: added it to JS, there is no server-side validation.

[HKuz]

Latest push includes:

• PO validation fixes and removal of the workaround code that set ignore validate flags
• hides update_stock check box in a subcontracting PI (if the WO subcontracting workflow is enabled)
• For PO and PI (if WO subcontracting is enabled): removes the create Purchase Receipt button, also removes the create Subcontracting Order button from the PO

The validation fix ended up needing the monkey patch in __init__ vs a query change. The override whitelisted function with an in-function monkey patch worked great as long as that got called in a session first by say, adding an item to a form in the UI. However, the get_item_details and problematic validate_item_details get called in the validation process purely on the server side when we create a PO from a WO. So if I ran bench migrate and refreshed the app, then tried creating the PO programmatically off the WO before a client-side call, it used the erpnext versions and would error out. But putting the patch in __init__ handled that case.

[agritheory]

We are going to want to very clearly comment the override in __init__, it's just about the biggest footgun possible.

[agritheory]

@HKuz Please pull / rebase. This now incorporates the changes from version-14. What needs validation now is that the manual tests for this work. Automated tests for the other features pass.

[HKuz]

@agritheory - I retested the latest code and all functionality looked good. I had to make one tweak to the PI stock entry query to ignore entries against a cancelled PO (this came up when a subcontracting PO's WO had stock entries, then I added a new WO to that PO (cancelling and amended it), then when I fetched stock entries in the PI I saw the ones for the original WO displayed for both the cancelled and the amended PO).