Inventory
(UXPROD-785)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | Lotus (R1 2022) | Parent: | Inventory |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P3 |
| Reporter: | Charlotte Whitt | Assignee: | Dennis Bridges |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | acq-dev-grooming, inventory, metadatamanagement, po-mvp, round_iv, short_term_solution | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Inventory | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Analysis Estimator: | Charlotte Whitt | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | Small < 3 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Aliaksei Chumakou | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front-End Confidence factor: | Medium | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | Small < 3 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Andrei Makaranka | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Thunderjet | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Kiwi Planning Points (DO NOT CHANGE): | 14 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Rank: | 75.91 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Ranking Note: | CW: Created after ranking exercise. The solution with a minimum data set has been discussed with a MM-SIG working group and AM-Breaux.
DB: Since I have taken responsibility for this feature I have adjusted ranking to fit with my other feature rankings. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Grand Valley (Full Sum 2021): | R5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: hbz (TBD): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Lehigh (MVP Summer 2020): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: MO State (MVP June 2020): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): | R2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): | R5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Overview: For the mvp we implement the POL number in the Acquisition accordion. The POL number is a hotlink directly back to the Order record. Usecase: UX-wireframe for the simple implementation with the POL number as hotlink directly back to the Order record, and two elements more: the Order status, Order status date and Price. The long term solution, would be to implement a fuller set or data elements - but that will be beyond mvp -
|
| Comments |
| Comment by Natascha Owens [ 30/Sep/19 ] |
|
Cataloging staff need to see POL number and be able to click through linked number to see order information. |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/Jun/20 ] |
|
This is critical for uChicago (round_iv) - https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/COHORT2019/Round+IV+-+Post+MVP |
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 17/Jun/20 ] |
|
Chicago comment from Round IV Outliers spreadsheet: We felt like there was too much risk for people not to know whether an inventory record was attached to a PO.
|
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 09/Oct/20 ] |
|
Dennis Bridges, Charlotte Whitt and I wanted to get your thoughts on which team should do the work on this feature (Thunderjet vs CF vs both). What do you think? CC: Marc Johnson |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 09/Oct/20 ] |
|
Cate Boerema I've been thinking a little about this and now that we have some experience with the inventory module I'm more inclined to say that Thunderjet could probably work on implementing this workflow. It is closely related to one of our receiving features as well. https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-2373 |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 12/Oct/20 ] |
|
Thanks Dennis Bridges! I think that would be great, as the workflow initiates with Acquisitions. It would probably require less coordination if Thunderjet could do the entire feature. And, you're right, it does seem to have a lot of overlap with
Charlotte Whitt, if this makes sense to you, could you please reassign the feature to Thunderjet and Dennis? |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 05/Nov/20 ] |
|
Notes from Slack #product-owners: Charlotte Whitt: Today at 1:33 PM Cate Boerema: 7 hours ago Charlotte Whitt: 4 hours ago Dennis Bridges: 3 hours ago |
| Comment by Sharon Beltaine [ 12/Nov/20 ] |
|
Reporting SIG: For reporting, we would like the POL to link to holdings and items in particular (this is not important to us for display, we just need the data element link). Having this link enables us to have reports that link the PO with a specific holding or item. Having holdings and items links is important for summarizing costs at the order level. The thin thread implementation of this data element is fine for reporting. |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 16/Nov/20 ] |
|
Dennis Bridges, could you please have Thunderjet revisit the estimates on this feature? The estimates showing here were done by Niels Erik eons ago. |
| Comment by Andrei Makaranka [ 18/Nov/20 ] |
|
Hi Dennis Bridges, Cate Boerema, There are to options: Thanks |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 18/Nov/20 ] |
|
Hi Andrei Makaranka To the best of my knowledge, then these data are read only in the Item record (and the Holdings (
|
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Nov/20 ] |
|
Note that this could be done with UI only, but the dev team recommends creating an API to support it. This will limit the number of calls needed to retrieve the information from orders and order lines. |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 20/Nov/20 ] |
|
I agree, that we should create an API support as well. We need to build the most robust solution for this. |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 19/Jan/21 ] |
|
Hi Holly Mistlebauer Dennis Bridges - getting this work done is often mentioned by the SMEs. Are their any change that this work can be picket up either by Dennis' team or Core Functional team for R1 2021 with the extended deadline? |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Jan/21 ] |
|
Charlotte Whitt We are still juggling the deadline changes, but I'm sorry to say I think it would be a stretch goal for us at best. Even just to include one of these two features. With the complexity of our current features it would be a mistake to commit to additional work before we have at least completed our first fiscal year UAT. All I could suggest would be comparing the priority of these features with https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-2417 as we have not yet started implementing it. It is at risk and was not identified as a showstopper so perhaps it could be substituted for one of the others. However, it currently has a higher calculated rank. |
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 19/Jan/21 ] |
|
Charlotte Whitt: This is work that would be appropriate for the Core Functional team? |
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 19/Jan/21 ] |
|
Charlotte Whitt: I see. You are saying that the 'Lost & paid' status didn't show up. Got it! I am trying to test this but I can't get any of the settings in SNAPSHOT to work. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Jan/21 ] |
|
Holly Mistlebauer currently none of this information will display in inventory. This feature would involve making a call from inventory to orders to retrieve information based on the Instance ID, Holding ID or Item ID. This UXPROD is specifically inventory requesting information from the orders app based on the Item UUID of the item you are viewing, so it can be displayed on the item record. After a review of this feature we determined that an API should be added to mod-orders that allows Inventory to make this request efficiently and get the info it needs to display. Thus there is some BE work to be done in orders and some FE work to be done in inventory to make this work. The acquisitions accordion on the Holding record is currently just a set of text fields stored in inventory.
Hope that helps clarify the scope of both this feature and
|
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 27/Jan/21 ] |
|
Hi Dennis Bridges and Holly Mistlebauer - If Core Functional can pick up this work instead of Thunderjet, that would be great. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 27/Jan/21 ] |
|
Hi Charlotte Whitt and Dennis Bridges Just trying to understand the Data Import field mapping implications. As far as I can tell, all of this will be drawn from the associated POLs automatically. Is that right? Will it only work if the item is created as part of the Order process? If the item is created as part of the Data Import process, would there be an opportunity to associate with the relevant POL manually somehow? (or via the Data Import process) Right now, this is just a blank accordion in the Data Import field mapping screen for the Holdings record. Let me know if we should have a quick meeting to discuss. Thank you! |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 27/Jan/21 ] |
|
My suggestion is that these data elements should not be editable in the Item record (or the Holdings record for that matter, but that's a different feature,
You are right Ann-Marie Breaux we also need to understand how data coming from updates by using the Data Import app should be populated in the Orders and Inventory, as my expectation would be that any updates in Inventory of acquisition data, should also be reflected in Orders etc. so the two apps stay in sync. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 27/Jan/21 ] |
|
Charlotte Whitt and Ann-Marie Breaux see my comment at https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-1925?focusedCommentId=11091&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel |
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 03/Feb/21 ] |
|
Dennis Bridges and Charlotte Whitt - To clarify, there are two user stories the Core Functional team would need to complete:
|
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/Feb/21 ] |
|
So the Core Functional team will take this features back? Cate Boerema send it in the direction of the Thunderjet team October last year (see the comments above) - but it would be all great if the Core Functional team now are able to pick up the work. I'll change the development team right away.
|
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 03/Feb/21 ] |
|
Thanks Holly Mistlebauer and Charlotte Whitt
|
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 09/Feb/21 ] |
|
Charlotte Whitt: I don't know when the Core Functional Team will be able to pick this up. The Juniper Capacity Plan will tell us what we can get done. This feature It is not ranked high by the institutions and we have extremely limited BE dev capacity. |
| Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 19/Feb/21 ] |
|
Dennis Bridges: Hi! This feature needs to be completed early in the Juniper development cycle. Will Thunderjet be able to complete this as needed? Thanks... P.S. The Core Functional Team has extremely limited back-end capacity right now, so we need some help from other teams. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Feb/21 ] |
|
Holly Mistlebauer I see
|
| Comment by Lisa McColl [ 25/Mar/21 ] |
|
This Jira assumes, I think, that there is a way to deliberately relate a PO to an item. It does this by default when a PO creates an Instance, Holdings, Item. What happens and how do you add an item with its own PO to an existing holdings/item? |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 25/Mar/21 ] |
|
Hi Lisa McColl You mean being able to create the link to the POL from the Inventory side? So if I'm manually adding an item record to an instance, being able to specify that item (and therefore its holdings and the holdings' instance) are related to a specific PO? What's a use case that would follow this flow? If it was ordered, then I think the POL should already be linked to the related Inventory records. But it does feel like the link (or maybe break the link and re-link) might need to be triggered from the Inventory side as well - I just can't think of a case off the top of my heard. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 25/Mar/21 ] |
|
Lisa McColl for a PO to be connected to an Item record it must have a connection to an instance. We would like to provide users with a method of changing that connection if they need to move an item/holding from one instance to another. The following story describes how we will allow users to manually change the connection between order and inventory instance. However as Ann-Marie Breaux mentioned this would happening in the orders app. We have not yet defined functionality that would allow users to edit connections when looking at the inventory record. Use cases would help us work through that. |
| Comment by Lisa McColl [ 26/Mar/21 ] |
|
Dennis Bridges and Ann-Marie Breaux - Thank you both so much for your answers! I wasn't thinking of starting from the Inventory app. Just starting from the Orders app, if a PO is created I see the link in FOLIO to the instance and I can see via Postman that there is an item HRID associated with it. What happens when you have a new PO that is for a purchase if an added volume, for example? That is another item on the same instance and holdings (for some libraries). How can that relationship between the newly purchased volume and the PO get established? (without a new instance being created). Or can't it? Ultimately it would be great if that PO was displayed in Inventory/Item Acquisitions accordion but I wonder how this Jira is possible because I don't see a way to make that explicit relationship when you are manually building a PO. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 26/Mar/21 ] |
|
No problem Lisa McColl, the connection is actually made at the POL level. In the UI you will see a "Look up" link under the title field which allows a user to choose an instance to connect to the POL. The results in the UUID of the instance being added to the POL. With this connection in place when item are created in receiving the item UUIDs are also stored in the POL within the "Piece" data. Piece is our receiving record. Part of the scope of
|
| Comment by Lisa McColl [ 26/Mar/21 ] |
|
Thank you Dennis Bridges. I have to sit with this and maybe try some in our test instance to let it soak in. I'm expecting that if I create a purchase order on and existing instance record (using the lookup you mentioned above), and receive this new POL, I will see a new item related to that POL in a Postman lookup. I hope I got that right! |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 22/Dec/21 ] |
|
We were able to address this functionality earlier than expected leveraging existing APIs, so it has been assigned to and will release with Lotus. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 18/Apr/22 ] |
|
Testing successful in bugfest-lotus |