We have various parts that have multiple manufacturers, with multiple manufacturer part numbers.
We assign an internal part number (“DPN”).
So, for example, for our part number DPN100, it could be made by ManufacturerA with part number MA100, MA101, MA102; ManufacturerB with part number MB786, MB787, MB889, and Manufacturer C with part number ZZZX1.
These are often little tiny things like electrolytic capacitors for which various different capacitors will all be within spec. Due to outages, shortages, and shipping delays, which are all very frequent in this industry, it is necessary to be flexible and able to build one of our products at a moment’s notice from what we have on hand…and to be able to keep these things straight when we are ordering parts to have on hand.
In my eyes the distinction between Supplier vs Manufacturer may be a bit misleading. I believe Manufacturer is a Supplier in the logic of ERPNext.
(Can’t really say what the field Manufacturer on the item form (Supplier Details Section) is meant to be for though and I could imagine it can just be ignored)
the PR u reference to has been merged into the develop branch (which is the regular method of adding new functionality) March 2017 @randersen. So we’d try to figure out how it apparently has not found it’s way into the current stable version (v10, v11) of ERPNext yet.
I have revived the issue and PR on github in order to find this out as well
EDIT looks a bit as if that merge didn’t go through somehow. Let’s see whether reviving the github issue and PR leads to anything
Yeah… Looks like a bunch of changes were reverted.
Supplier and Manufacturer are not equivalent, and cannot be substituted for one another. Most purchasing, in our industry, is from Suppliers where you can purchase items from many different manufacturers…
So we need both Suppliers and Manufacturers, as child tables, in our use case.