Add supplier name into default invoice template

Software improvement 5-Done
1

This Icebox picks up an identified ‘quick fix’ that can provide significant functionality improvement for quick Packing and Invoicing, while awaiting more complex changes in Delivery Note and Packing Sheets.

Much information is duplicated from Enable quicker packing and invoicing [Pt 1 - Bulk Print] - referred to below as “Part 1”.

What is the need / problem

Today there is no easy way to print individual packing sheets. Part 1 will make it really easy to generate pdfs and print multiple invoices in one go.

Although it is not ideal, the fact is that today the invoice is used by lots of hubs as a “double use case” document: they print it, use it to prepare the basket, and then put it in the basket so the customer gets their invoice.

However . .

I just want to note here that printing (bulk or individual) invoices as they are now does not enable quicker packing. This is because the OFN current invoice does NOT have the supplier’s name on it. In order for Mary or Shannon to pack orders, they MUST know whose products to put into the order, because it is very likely that they have the same product/variant from multiple suppliers. Invoices do not suit the purpose of packing - so even with bulk printing of them, Mary & Shannon will still have to go into the backend reports and do a pack by customer report. This has all the needed information - but she has to fiddle with a CSV to make it printable, so she can give copies to the people doing the packing

The emailed order confirmation does include the Supplier name.

image
image1238×430 15.2 KB

and the invoice is very similar but doesn’t . . (NB. I cannot see or recall any reason why we didn’t just include it, I suspect oversight rather than intent)

image
image1606×392 41.2 KB

Who does it impact

  • Mary / Shannon who are organizing packing and do the invoicing - even with bulk printing they still can’t use the invoices as packing sheets

What is the current impact of this problem

  • Mary / Shannon who are organizing packing and do the invoicing - even with bulk printing they still can’t use the invoices as packing sheets

What is the benefit in focusing on this

Time efficiency for food enterprise managers, who are the ones we want to focus on serving.

Potential solutions that will solve this problem

1- Add Supplier name to the invoices, in smaller text under the Product Name - just as on the emailed order confirmation

2- Wait for full packing sheet overhaul as in Hub can easily generate accurate packing slips - #7 by robert

Value x ease analysis and selection of our feature candidate

1 - Add Supplier name is our IMMEDIATE feature candidate :slight_smile:

T-shirt size of the selected feature candidate

XS (to be confirmed by a dev)

Metrics to measure if need is well satisfied after feature has been implemented

  • Mary can print “invoices packing sheets” for her OC in less than 10 min.
    NB. This metric cannot be completed for Part 1 UNLESS Part 2 is completed

Feature owners

Product: @Kirsten
Tech: @maikel

Epic and/or project board where you can follow implementation

Connected wishlist and discovery discussions:

2

@tschumilas @MyriamBoure @sstead . .anyone want to review this to get it into votable before tonight’s meeting? :slight_smile:

3

I love you @Kirsten! This makes me smile. I think all that is necessary is the supplier name - the other information is there.
A side question - on your example above - the GST shows beside each product - but on CAnada’s invoices it shows in one lump at the bottom. So we’ve been putting an ‘’ on any variant that is taxable - and adding a note to the invoice that says, "’ indicates GST is applicable. So the buyer knows which items the tax was calculated on.

But how do you get your GST to show beside each product? Is there a setting for this? (or is this because your instance includes taxes in the shop price maybe?)

4

I’m not sure @tschumilas - I think if you are suggesting that our instance is running a different tax setting (include in shop price?) that is most likely it. I would be surprised if the invoices were hard-coded to pick up gst only. @MyriamBoure @NickWeir do you have any insights on this?

5

Could it be this setting https://ofn-user-guide.gitbook.io/ofn-super-admin-guide/ofn-platform-configuration/invoice-settings?

I’m not 100% sure so you should try both checked/unchecked and see how it differs @tschumilas

6

I am sorry - don’t know

8

@Kirsten regarding this wishlist we have a clearly identified feature candidate, so I would just change the title for “add supplier name into default invoice template” as this seems to be the second selected feature candidate for a need that has been prioritized by the community. I added a guessed T-shirt size that we need to check with a dev. As it has already been prioritized I move it to inception ready, I think we just need to specify that there are two models of invoices and we need to decide if we apply that change to both models. I would suggest we don’t, the second invoice template is the French one, and is used also to print receipt so I’m afraid it mess up how receipts look like, so I suggest we only modify default Aus invoice template (that is used by Canada). So if you agree we can precise that and put to pipe-ready and open an issue in the new feature backlog (first column in product dev backlog project).

9

Yay! Yes I agree that we only need to deal with the Aus/Canada invoice template. @maikel could you t-shirt size this for us? (S, M, L?)

10

@tschumilas did you get around to checking if this ‘invoice-setting’ dealt with oyour tax thing? https://ofn-user-guide.gitbook.io/ofn-super-admin-guide/ofn-platform-configuration/invoice-settings

11

sorry - I should have posted my findings. I was wrong - the invoice setting does NOT alter the problem I was describing. Basically, I was looking for a way to display the tax - where applicable - per item on the invoice. There is no way to do that in an instance where tax is calculated at checkout (as opposed to being included in the shop price.). this is not a big issue - just not as transparent as ideal. I have one user who doesn’t care - they have only a few taxable items and showing the tax total at the bottom of the invoice is fine. I have a second hub whose customers seem to want to know which products have tax - and that user is putting an (*) on taxable items and then we have a note at the bottom of her invoice indicating that means there was tax on that item.

The more I have been learning about sales taxes in Canada, the more I realized that there are some more fundamental changes to OFN that will need to happen. I suspect we’ll have to get into this in the US too. Multiple tax types and rates at different sub-instance levels for example, It will be important for anyone trying to interface with an accounting package too. But - I’d say this isn’t an immediate fish fo fry – but I’m going to be on the US call next week and I might just table it. We could set up a NA working group to at least understand what is ultimately needed perhaps. I think I have an accountant who would help us here in Canada. (We’ll need an accountant to work on this - its stupidly complex). I echo the point I’ve made elsewhere though – if we want ot be a global instance - we’ll need a way for OFN to be more flexible about taxation I think.

But this should be in a thread about taxation - is there one?

In terms of name on default invoice - I’d say we still really need that - but likely don’t understand the tax thing now to move on it.

12

@Kirsten T-shirt size XS to S, probably affecting 3 or 4 files (logic, template, styles). Do we have a scale for t-shirt sizes?

13

@MyriamBoure what do i need to do to progress this?

14

@MyriamBoure @danielle as this is already prioritised, is XS to S etc - can I create an issue and get it into ‘dev ready’? please? :slight_smile:

15

I don’t see why not @Kirsten.

Looking at the process map the next step for you is to incept it, create the GH epic/stories, and then get it slated for prioritisation in the roadmap by the product curation team.

16%20pm

16

Agree, it’s of course not the thing with most votes but it has some votes and is XS probably (to check) so let’s move on @Kirsten and make @tschumilas happy :slight_smile: !

1 Like
17

@MyriamBoure and @Kirsten - need help with process here. This item is still high on the list of what I want to vote for - but its not a ‘voting candidate’. Does it still go into the list of issues for voting?

Just a refresher - remember - there was some discussion on the bigger issue of generating accurate packing slips

I think we agreed ? that packing slips is a larger issue (and frankly I’m suppose to be leading that, and haven’t pulled a discussion piece together yet) – so I’d still like to vote for adding supplier name to default invoice template as a good, XS, short term solution to the packing slip challenges.

18

@tschumilas as far as I understand, we had already prioritized the bulk invoice printing and said we would add that bit as for Can that was needed for the need to be satisfied, so for me this is already prioritized, we will incept (should be suuuuper quick!) and we need a PO for it (it’s so tiny that maybe doesn’t need tech owner and kick off…) the PO will open an issue and put it in “feature backlog” so that it can be prioritized (before or after mobile ready which is already waiting for space in the pipe)… @Rachel it is super tiny but do you want to be PO for it ? Else I’m happy to :wink: We need to remember that there are two invoice templates and decide if we apply that change to both or not. Tiny inception but still a bit of inception.

19

So to answer your question you don’t have to vote for it anymore @tschumilas it went already through the first step :wink:

20

You are amazing - @MyriamBoure and @Rachel - BIG thanks for this. Means I have another vote to cast!! :yum:

21

Seems that this is already in the delivery pipe being built, yes @MyriamBoure? It’s #3437 and is being built by @maikel. So I’m changing the sub category of this to be in progress.

Please advise and move it back to the inception category if this isn’t correct :slight_smile: