Community: Inventory and MRP mailing list archives

MRP discussion structure

- 09/04/2014 20:31:29
Hi All

I think, according to the guidlines, this is the right place for the following suggestion:

I fell, that discussion would be easier, if we could comment on the spreadsheet directly. Like this we can easily keep track of the items we are interested in and use the pad for more general stuff about the requirements and finally this mailing list, to open a specialized discussion about pad's general stuff or just organisatory stuff (like this one).

So the suggestion in bulletpoints:
  1. Discussions about specific requirements in the Spreadsheet
  2. Inputs about structural questions / classifications / paradigms on the pad
  3. Deleagte discussion about pad items into the mailing list, with clear focus on a pad item and use mailing list for organisatory questions.
What do you think? I personally feel uneasy with the current set up. There is no specified room for point 2, so I fear we end up like in the sister discussion in the general mailing list: Talking about details without having clear the foundations and paradigms.

I hope we won't repeat the same error, though.

Saludos Cordiales
David Arnold

David Arnold BA HSG / Analista
315 304 13 68/

devCO - empresa de consultoría de sistemas (en fundación)

This e-mail message may contain confidential or legally privileged information and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the information herein is prohibited. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, or contain viruses. Anyone who communicates with us by e-mail is deemed to have accepted these risks. devCO is not responsible for errors or omissions in this message and denies any responsibility for any damage arising from the use of e-mail. Any opinion and other statement contained in this message and any attachment are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.