I think you got me wrong, those are bugs and they have to be fixed before moving any further with any new suggestions. What I meant is that the bounty was mostly about the design and other futures like adding client interface, client queue, item grouping, keypad, item level discount and price change, touch friendly … etc Those are all delivered and working fine, the problem here is mostly the slow search bar and offline syncing integrity and those has nothing to do with previous bounty as they are result of problems with the offline implementations which existed before the bounty and its still causing most of the bugs mentioned earlier.
All I’m saying is that offline implementation through the browser can’t be valid because the cache lives in the browser session. Thats why the only way I (at least in my opinion) is to have a native app for the POS, that how would you provide efficient offline functionality with security and data integrity, and it will solve other problems for hardware compatibility.
Well, the Foundation has a volunteer CEO (me), volunteer Directors and four dedicated developers. The Foundation does not have domain experience in every module and feature of ERPNext.
Therefore we need people from the community to step up and assume responsibility for putting together the specs. Sure it could be biased, but it will not be any more or less biased than if a Foundation resource were to do it. And even if it were more biased it would be more thorough thanks to the contributor’s, involvement, passion and familiarity with this domain/feature.
A Foundation resource will definitely validate the specs before we get onto the development stage.
So my request to everybody is: Stop complaining and start compiling (the specs) and when somebody does, please don’t use paragraphs or justifications. Just crisp bullet points. Like (all hypothetical points - any resemblance to real points is serendipitous):
Submittal of POS transaction must be reliable
Search of item code must be exponentially faster
Easier maneuverability between various screens
Please just provide the business requirement. Let somebody knowledgeable figure out if it is because of caching, because of the way we have implemented offline POS that’s resulting in the problem.
You could add security to this issue, if you have concerns around this.
Somebody, please step up.
You guys know we have a Foundation Fellowship program going. Here’s the link:
I’m not saying stepping up will get you the fellowship, but it would definitely be the beginning of the journey to Fellowship.
Foundation fellowship is a good thing, but for me, if we want people to contribute to the project there must be good documentation of development, not just youtube webinars.
I speak for our case. We have many peculiarities in the business, so we will have to make enough modifications and we do not see a clear starting point. As I said in other threads our intention is to free all code that does not have to do with internal knowledge logic obviously, we also have in mind translate the user manual to Spanish since we have seen that this translation is abandoned, etc. But before collaborating with contributions for the community we first need to have the erp running in the company (companies), and running stable.
I agree 100% with you that here are two parts that have to push the development of Erpnext, on the one hand the foundation and on the other hand the community. But at the moment I think it’s becoming a social mass of users and I think it’s time to ‘sacrifice’ and efforts to dedicate it to giving tools to the community, be it documentation, training as a consultant without thinking so much about the business, create knowledge within it to grow as other projects have done. Let’s remember how Odoo started …
For us it is a critical functionality POS module, we would have no problem assuming even developing a ‘corrected’ version, but we do not have a knowledge base of the operation of frappe / erpnext right now to take that task with guarantees.
We would be happy to be part of the Foundation Fellowship. This would mean that we are using ERpnext in production and contributing to the community. Hopefully this will come but right now I think the entry conditions are ‘high’, because we do not see that there are the right tools for people to be able to join this with guarantees. I always talk about the part of collaborating with code, which is the complex part.
I appreciate your input and can empathize with your frustrations.
But all I thought was to ask for a volunteer to compile the requirements.
We might even be able to depute a Foundation development resource to translate the requirements into code and solutions.
You perhaps read too much into my words, where I was trying to inspire the community to contribute code. I mean, in a way, I am, but that is the medium - long term hope.
For now, we have Foundation resources (4 Programmers) and we can deploy them for this project if somebody volunteers to come up with the requirement list.
I think the first step to take would be to solve the issue of transactions not being submitted even if there is a solid internet connection. That seems to be a critical issue.
The other problems are potentially problematic, but losing transactions is critical, in my opinion.
Would love to see some contributions from 
