Report that isolates various enterprise fees

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007f4315a9df08>


Agreed in delivery train on Tuesday night to move this into production with @maikel as tech lead. I have created an epic in Product Feature Backlog but in doing so wanted to check something about the location of this report

It seems like it could be done as a sub-report in a couple of different places, which would give it a ‘default’ set of existing filters. @tschumilas @sstead or @CLFC do you have a view on which of these would be best?

Payment Reports

Orders and Fulfilment Reports

Additional options to filter by Producer and Order Cycle (seems useful)

Order Cycle Management


The more filters the better in my opinion- gives flexibility.
Top priority: Distributor, producers, order cycle, shipping method
Lower priority: date range, payment method
I don’t suppose you could filter by fee?


I would say under orders and fulfillment reports seems most logical to me.

I also agree with @sstead that a filter by fee should be a priority - particularly for things like fundraiser fees where you REALLY need to be able to get that information quickly on any given OC if there is a fundraiser taking place.


ok, so from what @sstead is suggesting there isn’t a clear fit under Orders & Fulfillment (as it is missing Shipping Method) or under Order Cycle Management as it doesn’t have Producers

Neither has filter by Fee

My inclination here is to try and keep this as ‘quick win’ as we can - the more complex it becomes the longer it will drag out. So I am proposing that we put in one of these place for now and get it done. Then we can review and request additional filters later?

So to make that call - @sstead @CLFC @tschumilas is the ability to filter by Producers OR by Shipping / Payment Method more important for this report?


NB. I am getting an opinion from @maikel and @kristinalim on this . . if creating a new view is relatively painless it might make sense to have its own, rather than worrying about dealing with new filters later . .

Does anyone know anything about the Order Cycle Management reports (I am not familiar with them) - is there a reason why it is not possible to filter by Producer? @lin_d_hop are these UK things?


ok, so @maikel says

Which would suggest we just create a new row for Fee Report . .

so ugly, but we’re not dealing with the general problem of reports now, much as we would like to

working on story map in the new project board at


Yep UK things. The report sorts results by producers. We developed that report to a very specific use case. The report is a mess, like many of them :slight_smile:


I would vote by producer. But I’m good with a new row for ‘fee reports’ as well.


confused here - it seemed above that being able to filter by fee was the priority - no? I think being able to filter by fee is the top priority (ie: in a given order cycle, I want to be able to isolate the amount collected in a ‘fundraising fee’). Second, filter by producer is a priority (ie: in a given OC, I want to be able to identify the fees collected by producer). Third, filter by delivery fee (ie: in a given OC, I want to know the amount of fees collected for delivery by each distributor). Sorry for being behind on comments about this.


@tschumilas If I’m not mistaken, we’re talking about filtering the fee report by producer here. If I’m wrong on that, someone please correct me!!


you’re killing me. If you are not happy with what is proposed in the project, particularly issues #2616 and #2672 you must SPECIFY NOW exactly what you want to change as @kristinalim is working on the report @tschumilas @CLFC


From what I can see there, it looks okay to me.


i guess we could add a filter for ‘fee type’ if that is going to make a big difference @tschumilas?


So 2672 says - Should include filters for: Start/End Date, Order Cycle, Distributor/Hub, Producer, Fee Name, Payment Methods and Shipping Methods - so that talks about all the possible filters in my view. Thats why I’m confused now about this conversation re: which filters are priorities. Wouldn’t a user just put in whatever combination of filters they need? I"m so sorry if I"m not understanding this. When I look at the mock up on 2672 - it looks perfect to me.
And it has ‘fee name’ so - that is more focused than ‘fee type’. If we have fee name, we wouldn’t need fee type I don’t think. At least I can’t think of why - a user would just do several searches filtering by different fee names I think.


great - we moved to slack as moving into action mode @tschumilas and there was a message there (channel #fee-report) to ignore those questions as were building new interface. So it was just that when you came back here you were commenting on a superceded conversation. I should have closed this and put links to slack and the github project clearly here so that was obvious! Sorry, me learning too :slight_smile:


This project has moved out of Icebox into Dev. You can follow the project on Github at and join the conversation on dedicated Slack channel #fee-report

Report that isolates various 'fees'