Mailing-List: contact dev-help@fineract.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGGKnDC1DRHP56FOW36zO92v9mbYrg+1pz+7u5uNzYxWNrS-9g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGGKnDCAWXjoCi814TB=oDZU7_uM6XXZXW1QAvqibYFs55LUmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DB3PR03MB0748E73AD1D126416ED1857A95080@DB3PR03MB0748.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGGKnDBuPQ5zqUQE2x5em0Xnyho6wcVFeP9T-u3cEkseMbmMtA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGGKnDC1DRHP56FOW36zO92v9mbYrg+1pz+7u5uNzYxWNrS-9g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Thisura Philips <ttcphilips@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 00:37:08 +0530
Message-ID: <CAGGKnDDA+AnGB90Am=d4hkojcb-4PDYKo7BnvdSf6KfsWYgsow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Does the changes in apache fineract platform necessary to fix
 FINERACT issues
To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org,
	Mifos Software Development <mifos-developer@lists.sourceforge.net>
Cc: markus.geiss@live.de
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113926648dbc5f054cd4aea7
archived-at: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 19:07:14 -0000

--001a113926648dbc5f054cd4aea7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

[Adding mifos list]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Thisura Philips <ttcphilips@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Markus,
>
> There is a limitation in implementing this in the backend. In the
> database, we are storing only the "classification_enum" in the
> "acc_gl_account"
> Classification Enum has the following values for respective account types=
.
>           ASSET - 1
>           LIABILITY - 2
>           EQUITY - 3
>           INCOME - 4
>           EXPENSE - 5
> The values can't be used to reflect the ascending order of names.
> Therefore ORDER BY "classification_enum" won't work in the sql query.
> There fore we have two options.
>           1. Write a sorting function to sort the result set based on the
> classification_enum and then on gl_code.
>           2. Change the classification_enum values to reflect the
> ascending order of account types and add ORDER BY classification_enum ASC=
,
> gl_code ASC
> The changed enums will look like follows.
>            ASSET - 1
>            LIABILITY - 5
>            EQUITY - 3
>            INCOME - 4
>            EXPENSE - 2
> What is the best option? From the maintenance point of view, I think the
> first option is better. But from the performance point of view, the secon=
d
> option is better.
>
> I have sent this PR
> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-fineract/pull/330> to order the
> results according to gl_code. But there is no use of that if we can't hav=
e
> the same with classification_enum as the first preference is given to
> classification_enum.
>
> Your ideas will be a great help to resolve this issue.
>
> Thanks and Regards.
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Thisura Philips <ttcphilips@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Markus,
>>
>> Exactly, it should be independent from the client.
>> At the moment account in charts of accounts are ordered using orderBy
>> directive.
>> I will send the response from the platform ordering them as expected in
>> this issue. <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-389>
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Thanks & Regards.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Markus Gei=C3=9F <markus.geiss@live.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Thisura,
>>>
>>> features like the one you've mentioned should find their place within
>>> the platform.
>>>
>>> Just imagine we have not only the community-app but also an android app
>>> plus additional UIs we even don=E2=80=99t know about.
>>>
>>> It is best practice to implement those kind of changes within the
>>> backend, so you don=E2=80=99t need to reimplement them with every clien=
t.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Markus
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Thisura Philips [mailto:ttcphilips@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 05:12 AM
>>> To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Does the changes in apache fineract platform necessary to fix
>>> FINERACT issues
>>>
>>> Hi devs,
>>> Just a little bit of misunderstanding.
>>> Let's take an example. The ticket at [1] <https://issues.apache.org/jir
>>> a/browse/FINERACT-389> requests to arrange the accounts that fall under
>>> one account type in order of their GL codes.
>>> This could be done easily with the changes at [2] <
>>> https://github.com/openMF/community-app/pull/2157>. But this change is
>>> in community-app.
>>>
>>> My question is, whether the fix is correct. Do we need to correct these
>>> at the platform level? Or is the suggested fix in [2] <
>>> https://github.com/openMF/community-app/pull/2157>.
>>>
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-389
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-389>
>>> [2] https://github.com/openMF/community-app/pull/2157
>>> <https://github.com/openMF/community-app/pull/2157>
>>>
>>> Thanks and regards.
>>>
>>> --
>>> T.T.C Philips (BSc.Eng (Undergrad))
>>> Computer Science and Engineering,
>>> Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology(SLIIT)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> T.T.C Philips (BSc.Eng (Undergrad))
>> Computer Science and Engineering,
>> Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology(SLIIT)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> T.T.C Philips (BSc.Eng (Undergrad))
> Computer Science and Engineering,
> Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology(SLIIT)
>
>
>
>


--=20
T.T.C Philips (BSc.Eng (Undergrad))
Computer Science and Engineering,
Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology(SLIIT)

--001a113926648dbc5f054cd4aea7--