Add possibility to hide lots with 0 quantity

Hello everyone!

We recently received a request from SELV implementation for a new improvement that we think would be very reasonable to also include in the Core project. We need to add a possibility to hide lots with 0 quantity to make the process of creating inventories less tedious(deleting all items with stock 0 or adding 0 in the existing stock).

Reported problem
The main issue is that as the system is used, the number of lots with lots with quantity 0 will increase, making the process of creating inventories extremely tedious (deleting items with stock 0, or adding 0 in the existing stock).

Expected behavior.

  1. If a lot of a product reaches stock 0, the user can eliminate it from the inventories and stock cards by clicking the remove button currently displayed in the physical inventory for all products with stock 0. Please take a look at the screenshot below.
  2. If a product is eliminated, it should not appear in the stock cards and in future inventories.
  3. User should be able to add a product previously eliminated by following the normal processes (through physical inventories or receive). If a product that was eliminated is re-added, all its historic movements need to be displayed in the stock card.

What we think would be the most reasonable is to add a flag to a lot that would identify if this lot is hidden or not. If lot is hidden, then it’s not displayed either in physical inventory or in the stock card. We would use SELV budget for that since this improvement is really important for them. As this is something that we would like to address soon, I think that the best approach would be to do it as a part of a patch release.

Please let me know what do you think about it.

Best,
Dominika

Thanks @dbienkowska nice write-up.

This looks like a good addition to me - one comment of clarification would be that when you say “add a flag to a lot” I read that as add a flag to a stock-card, as the card carries the relationship from facility to product/orderable to lot and then quantity. That means that the hiding and un-hiding is per facility. Does that sound right?

Best,
Josh

Thanks for putting this together, @dbienkowska! I have a couple of comments:

  1. Using the red button and “Remove” language indicates that this is a destructive action but this is simply hiding extra information that might be confusing
  2. Rather than having to individually hide lots with a zero quantity, would it be more simple to add a checkbox above the table to hide or show all zero quantity lots?

-Wes

Sorry for late response but I’ve just gathered all the needs.

@joshzamor Thanks for this suggestion. Sure, that sounds fine and is a really good point.

@ibewes Adding a checkbox would not really be the best idea. There will be lots with 0 quantities that the user will still need to see in the inventory and having a global toggle will force end user to see a lot of lots with zero quantity. From user perspective there is no distention between hiding and removing, but we should definitely align with design language of the core product. What do you think?

Best,
Dominika

I’m not sure I totally understand why having some zero’d lots be hidden while others are visible is consistent or more clear. Why do users need to see some zero’d lots but not others?

-Wes

Felimone answered that it’s needed because there can be lot with 0 quantity that is still in circulation, and lots with 0 quantity that are not circulating. Does that covers your doubts?

Best,
Dominika

Thanks, @dbienkowska, that does help me understand the use-case.

That’s great. Do you think that we can do this improvement in the core project or should we implement it only for SELV?

Hi @ibewes and @joshzamor. Any update on this one?

Hello @ibewes and @joshzamor,

Could you please let me know what is the decision regarding this one or would you prefer to talk about it and make the decision during the next product committee meeting?

Best,
Dominika

Yes Dominika, let’s discuss this in the next PC meeting. In general, I am fine adding the behavior (or at least the option for this behavior).

-Wes

Yesterday we had product committee meeting and we discussed this topic. We had several ideas for future improvements(auto hide, filters) but we all agreed that we should start with basic, direst user action first. We need to add “Hide” button next to each row with stock on hand 0 and once user clicks this button, the chosen row will be hidden in this physical inventory and ALSO in the next physical inventory and in the stock card. It’s not removed then and all it’s data is still in the database. It can be done “unhidden” by a physical inventory or receiving process again. We also need to thing about offline functionality while implementing.

@joshzamor @ibewes I think that a good idea would be to engage our internal UX designer so perhaps and hopefully we will find out how that should ideally work and get better idea than is already proposed. What do you think about it?

@ibewes @joshzamor Could you take a look at my question above?

I think I’ll defer to @ibewes - I think I have an idea of the general UX, however it might need a mockup to ensure the whole workflow is known.

Thanks @joshzamor. We would like to work on it soon since it’s very important for SELV implementation so could you please comment on that @ibewes. Do you think that we can start working on it or do we need a mockup for this?

@joshzamor Referring to previous statements. As for the implementation of the functionality, we decided to add the hide flag to the stock card level. This will not affect the current functionality.