Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Agreement #192

Closed
max3903 opened this issue Oct 11, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Agreement #192

max3903 opened this issue Oct 11, 2018 · 5 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@max3903
Copy link
Member

max3903 commented Oct 11, 2018

We would like to publish a module to manage content for agreements and contracts. The module is meant to be used by the legal team of a company and to allow them to define sections, clauses and template with their respective content that can be dynamic. Based on the template, an agreement can be created and the pdf document generated. The agreement would go through a workflow to finally become a contract with the customer signature.

Let us know if this repository is not the right place.

@max3903 max3903 added this to the 11.0 milestone Oct 11, 2018
@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

I think this one is correct. For the signing, we already have the module contract_digitized_signature.

@bealdav
Copy link
Member

bealdav commented Nov 8, 2018

Hi @max3903,

I've just seen this issue now, and also I see a module named agreement in v11.

I'm very surprised, that you haven't contacted Akretion (@alexis-via or me) about agreement_account and agreement_sale module done in v10.

These modules are really small and easy to override. It could have been a good way to complete them instead of define other implementation or at least ping us to see how to work together on these concepts.

Maybe we can talk to define how to implement the best modularity, on this matter with an RFC ?

Thanks

@max3903
Copy link
Member Author

max3903 commented Nov 8, 2018

Hi @bealdav,

I understand your frustration. The module we shared was done by our customer as a prototype. The project is not over yet so we still have the opportunity to converge.

@bealdav
Copy link
Member

bealdav commented Nov 11, 2018

Happy to hear that. Maybe we can open an RFC to define changes in v12 branch ? V11 can stay as it.

Thanks

@max3903
Copy link
Member Author

max3903 commented Nov 12, 2018 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants