Skip to content

Conversation

@tomas-goncalves
Copy link
Contributor

Allow Invoice Items to have notes. Uses this existing feature to help standardize items that need the same consistent note (e.g. Rangos Installed Lighting System).

@DaAwesomeP
Copy link
Member

It feels like this should play into #603 and the placeholder/initial text for invoice lines should come from invoice items (instead of being hardcoded in Ruby).

@tomas-goncalves
Copy link
Contributor Author

I thought about this after. I think they work for different purposes and are complementary, especially considering we don't want to have much pricing information in tracker for simplicity of updating.

One is a standard disclaimer we add to all Labor line items. The other one is for very specific items that need disclaimers.

I think having both is good for the final goal of spending less time on quote making, but this is definitely open to discussion.

@DaAwesomeP
Copy link
Member

DaAwesomeP commented Sep 23, 2025

I guess I am confused what the functional difference is between a memo and a note? Because every line already has a free-form text field in the form of the memo (which is called "Description" on the exported PDFs). What information would go in a note that you wouldn't put in a memo? This will also add another column to the quote/invoice which will squeeze things on a standard letter PDF I think.

@DaAwesomeP
Copy link
Member

Ah, I see my confusion. I am conflating invoice items and lines. So you want to pre-populate an invoice note from an invoice item. Makes sense.

However I do think this solves Labor category pre-populating too (#603). You would just have an Invoice Item/Preset called "Labor" to functionally have the same result.

@tomas-goncalves
Copy link
Contributor Author

tomas-goncalves commented Sep 30, 2025

@DaAwesomeP are you opposed to merging this PR? I think we agree it's a good idea. Then we can test it and if we feel there's still a necessity for #603 I'll revisit it

Copy link
Contributor

@NoRePercussions NoRePercussions left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll try to run it later but looks fine

@DaAwesomeP
Copy link
Member

@DaAwesomeP are you opposed to merging this PR? I think we agree it's a good idea. Then we can test it and if we feel there's still a necessity for #603 I'll revisit it

Hey sorry I missed this. Looks good to me, just see my suggested edits (some duplicated columns and lines maybe).

Co-authored-by: Perry Naseck <4472083+DaAwesomeP@users.noreply.github.com>
@tomas-goncalves
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fixed all comments @DaAwesomeP can we merge this then redeploy tracker?

@NoRePercussions NoRePercussions merged commit 04f69d7 into ABTech:master Dec 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants