Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

...

  • Spotlight for managing expense types on updated multi-select expense type view

  • Search bar for expense types

  • Filter for default / custom expense types

  • Edit custom expense type

  • Customize an icon for a custom expense type

  • Migration of all expense types of type “Other” to be custom expense types

    • Whomever takes this, if we get this far, please check with David Trapp before completing.

Shouldn’t have

Other context

...

  • For farmExpenseType, should use the existing convention around NULL or populated farm_id as to whether the type belongs to a specific farm or is universal

V1.0 has an “Other” type that should be removed in favour of documenting custom expense types. Ideally, each of these would be migrated to be custom expense types for the farm where they are created.

Code Block
SELECT DISTINCT note FROM "farmExpense" WHERE expense_type_id = '7ce971b4-1590-11ea-9019-22000b628b95'

...

Discussion on -

Decision to retain “Miscellaneous” described here:Investigation into "Other" category of expense types

...

For retired expense types:

  • Retiring is a soft delete

  • Retired expense types must…

    • Not be selectable on the multi-select expense type view for new expenses created post-retirement

    • Still appear as a potential filter (with some sort of visual treatment, e.g. “Mechanical (retired)”) elsewhere in Finances V2V1.05

    • Continue to show up as a category in reports, lists, tables elsewhere in Finances V2V1.05

  • Previously created expenses of the retired type must…

    • Be visible in lists and tables elsewhere in Finances V2V1.05 (per filter criteria)

These treatments☝️ are not in scope for this epic, but are helpful in framing future work in the Finances V2V1.0 module5 module.

...

When creating a new expense type, we should …

  • Check if the exact name and farm_id exist in the database and if so, don’t POST a new one but just set delete = FALSE

...

Should we have a separate section for retired expense types where they can be “un-retired”?

Not initially. We’ll do a check a few months after releasing this feature to see if that is a use case we need to support.