[sqr-users] biif0001.sqr and billing processing

[Bob Stone <bstone@fastenal.com>]

Hi there,

I have a question for anybody slightly familar with the main billing process
BIIF0001.sqr from PS 7.5.  We're trying to figure out the reason/logic
behind the piggy-backing (or chaining) of multile MRs (merchandise returns)
on the original invoices.  Why is it done this way?  Why not attach
everything back to the original invoice?  We don't have any programmers left
from when this was implemented.  

Right now if there's a 2nd MR where a line also appears on the first MR
(returns more of same product, ex.), it should attach to the MR instead of
the original invoice.  We're making changes to allow same-day MRs (and
multiple MRs on the same day), and we got to this piggy-back idea (which i
know how to implement for same-day too)...but I want to figure out why we
even do it that way.

're trying to figure out whether we need to do this 'piggy-backing'
idea...and the more we look at it, the more we think that it's unnecessary.
We don't have any of the original programmers left in my group...so we don't
know what they were thinking when they originally implemented this.  I'm not
sure why to keep it, anybody have any ideas?   (besides keeping PS delivered
stuff the exact same...which we aren't worried about).

What I mean by 'piggy-backing':  we have 2 MRs agains the same CG invoice,
the way they do it is to link MR1 to CG and then MR2 to MR1.

CG <--MR1 <--MR2

What I'm thinking we should do is just link them both back to the same CG:

CG <--MR1
      <--MR2

any ideas of possible problems?

Thanks

Bob Stone  
Fastenal PS AR/Billing Developer
(507) 453-8514


_______________________________________________
sqr-users mailing list
sqr-users@sqrug.org
http://www.sqrug.org/mailman/listinfo/sqr-users