Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
got it! so you do get reports for Parties - also amazing about the doing away with those duplications.... didn't even realise they existed....look forward to your manufacturing module changes..
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 11:23:49 AM UTC+5:30, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
Usually I look daily at the postings here but after having skipped a few days found a lot of news.
I is difficult to really apprehend the many changes introduced. Multilanguage of course is a revolutionary change. Maybe you shld recontact the visitor from Hungary sometimes back>> It was than communicated that this would be a very longtime goals.
Further, I have full trust in the new design of the team.
However, it is a bit difficult to see where priorities are. My interest are better retail functionalities, integration in accounts, and web(shop) functionality. Given the recent posting on Production a lot of time will go into “real” ERP stuff, modelling production processes. Transaltion was “a far away goal” and now seems on the treshold. Webfunctionality was announced a year ago, but now is no longer a priority issue.
As said, difficult to see where ERPNext is moving.
rgds robert
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:53:49 AM UTC+2, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it’s one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won’t be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the “pull” is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices…(maybe I haven’t understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting…
The problem in the system is that the ledger “Account” is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn’t any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger “Accounts Receivable” and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht’s tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
This rewrite was a prerequiste for the webshop. Language was an easy one and thanks to Google translate, we just spent like 2 days on it. But its done and dusted.
Webshop is still feature request #1
The problem was that our code was badly written and it was not possible to create, say in Invoice directly from code, lot of stuff was tied into the Invoice form that you see on the screen. It was a terrible design and had to be fixed.
Please say assured on the webshop. We will get there. I don't want to promise a date but we will surely get there!
best, Rushabh
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 12:33 PM, robert <be…@gmail.com> wrote:
Usually I look daily at the postings here but after having skipped a few days found a lot of news.
I is difficult to really apprehend the many changes introduced. Multilanguage of course is a revolutionary change. Maybe you shld recontact the visitor from Hungary sometimes back>> It was than communicated that this would be a very longtime goals.
Further, I have full trust in the new design of the team.
However, it is a bit difficult to see where priorities are. My interest are better retail functionalities, integration in accounts, and web(shop) functionality. Given the recent posting on Production a lot of time will go into "real" ERP stuff, modelling production processes. Transaltion was "a far away goal" and now seems on the treshold. Webfunctionality was announced a year ago, but now is no longer a priority issue.
As said, difficult to see where ERPNext is moving.
rgds robert
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:53:49 AM UTC+2, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
Assured, all the best with all the new exiting challenges, robert
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:12:11 AM UTC+2, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Robert,
Thanks for the feedback
This rewrite was a prerequiste for the webshop. Language was an easy one and thanks to Google translate, we just spent like 2 days on it. But its done and dusted.
Webshop is still feature request #1
The problem was that our code was badly written and it was not possible to create, say in Invoice directly from code, lot of stuff was tied into the Invoice form that you see on the screen. It was a terrible design and had to be fixed.
Please say assured on the webshop. We will get there. I don’t want to promise a date but we will surely get there!
best, Rushabh
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 12:33 PM, robert <be…@gmail.com> wrote:
Usually I look daily at the postings here but after having skipped a few days found a lot of news.
I is difficult to really apprehend the many changes introduced. Multilanguage of course is a revolutionary change. Maybe you shld recontact the visitor from Hungary sometimes back>> It was than communicated that this would be a very longtime goals.
Further, I have full trust in the new design of the team.
However, it is a bit difficult to see where priorities are. My interest are better retail functionalities, integration in accounts, and web(shop) functionality. Given the recent posting on Production a lot of time will go into "real" ERP stuff, modelling production processes. Transaltion was "a far away goal" and now seems on the treshold. Webfunctionality was announced a year ago, but now is no longer a priority issue.
As said, difficult to see where ERPNext is moving.
rgds robert
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:53:49 AM UTC+2, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
just wanted to know would this apply to the "items" in the item master?
Am currently making 4 different accounts for a fixed asset such as say "Car". There is the 1) the car asset account, 2) Car loan 3) car depreciation, 4) Car Loan Interest.
Would be great if I could see all in Car a/c ledger and maintain a generic Loan, depreciation, interest and Vehicle account.
Also if this is possible how would I transition? Since I am creating the ledgers now....
Regards,
Sonal
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 11:23:49 AM UTC+5:30, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Sonal <so…@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
just wanted to know would this apply to the "items" in the item master?
Am currently making 4 different accounts for a fixed asset such as say "Car". There is the 1) the car asset account, 2) Car loan 3) car depreciation, 4) Car Loan Interest.
Would be great if I could see all in Car a/c ledger and maintain a generic Loan, depreciation, interest and Vehicle account.
Also if this is possible how would I transition? Since I am creating the ledgers now....
Regards,
Sonal
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 11:23:49 AM UTC+5:30, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
thanks Umair, I'm going with your previous suggestion of the common remarks.
I hope someday there is some way to have item ledgers....
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 11:23:49 AM UTC+5:30, Rushabh Mehta wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your early feedback on the new design on the blog. The early feedback is mostly positive, there were some comments / apprehensions - posting them here.
describes the aspects that have to be taken into consideration when making a website, but i think is correct for system too.This Whell It is a more extensive version of the UX honeycomb that Peter Morville designed. It’s a very practical tool for UX designers to get a good overview of the process.I think as ERP systems should also apply this wheel and I think it's one of the purposes of the team ERPNext. Many ERP forget these important points and lose all sense of usability.They can go to the market and look at the other ERP and see the poverty of the interfaces you could be the next, come with us. but functionality is important because if we lose sight of the functionality I think we can go wrong so congratulations to the team for the screencast This screencast ERPnext team reminds me The first video on YouTube, uploaded at 8:27 PM on Saturday April 23rd, 2005.The video was shot by Yakov Lapitsky at the San Diego Zoo.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNQXAC9IVRw
Thanks for the feedback and encouragement! My personal view on UX is that we as a developers should use our tool as much as possible, since the best ideas come when using the tool repeatedly. Since we also use ERPNext to build ERPNext, (http://erpnext.com/how-erpnext-uses-erpnext.html) we end up using a lot of the forms reports etc. We also used usertesting.com sometime back to get a detailed view of how users are using the system and that was a great improvement. I think we should try this once more when we kind of freeze the UI.
(thanks for the link to the first youtube video - never knew about it!)
@Sonal - queries:
Looks like very improved forms but just wondering this purchase request wont pull existing sales orders or terms and conditions?
We will have the pull - push system, it just won't be a part of the form. We will have a generic tool so that you can pull data from any record and it will come as a button in the toolbar. The fields in the form are redundant once the "pull" is over, so we thought of simplifying that
Also your current accounting link is fabulous. Ledgers are made effortlessly, its literally the best I have seen.
Having no ledgers for parties might not be the best of practices...(maybe I haven't understood that properly) deprecating some stuff might be a good idea as would common purchase and sales tax masters but be careful while changing a good thing. Just saying that because I really liked the accounting...
The problem in the system is that the ledger "Account" is redundant because it represents a Customer or Vendor, also in a multi-company, this redundancy only increases. There isn't any sacrifice of features, just that now there will be only one ledger "Accounts Receivable" and the entry will be made against the Account & Party, so you can get reports from either and also there will be no duplication of records.
We also took Robert Becht's tip to make a new payment entry record. The problem is that if we include ability to book a payment against multiple invoices, it might get complex. Will post more on that later!
