Looking for volunteers to test and compare EDI data from the wild using the new code.
How to test and compare:
0. Install the working branch, including SQL upgrade script.
1. Find a PO that has an edi_message with message_type = ORDERS.
2. Apply an EDI Attribute Set to the EDI account which was used to generate the PO EDI in question.
2a) View stock attribute sets:
select * from acq.edi_attr_set;
2b) From above, get the ID of the attribute set that best matches the edi_account by vendor name. Then link an attribute set to the edi_account in question.
update acq.edi_account set attr_set = <attr_set_id> where id = <edi_account_id>;
3. Generate EDI for said PO using the new code:
$ ./edi_order_pusher.pl --test-mode --po-id 12345
4. Compare the new EDI to the EDI from the existing edi_message.
Fields containing dates (UNB, DTM) will differ to some degree, but other fields and overall message structure should match exactly.
5. Do this with various vendors / accounts.
The code has base attribute sets for known vendors matching the existing stock A/T JEDI template. Local modifications or vendors that are not represented may require either a change to values within the new EDI Attribute Set tables or new code.
Looking for volunteers to test and compare EDI data from the wild using the new code.
How to test and compare:
0. Install the working branch, including SQL upgrade script.
1. Find a PO that has an edi_message with message_type = ORDERS.
2. Apply an EDI Attribute Set to the EDI account which was used to generate the PO EDI in question.
2a) View stock attribute sets:
select * from acq.edi_attr_set;
2b) From above, get the ID of the attribute set that best matches the edi_account by vendor name. Then link an attribute set to the edi_account in question.
update acq.edi_account set attr_set = <attr_set_id> where id = <edi_account_id>;
3. Generate EDI for said PO using the new code: pusher. pl --test-mode --po-id 12345
$ ./edi_order_
4. Compare the new EDI to the EDI from the existing edi_message.
Fields containing dates (UNB, DTM) will differ to some degree, but other fields and overall message structure should match exactly.
5. Do this with various vendors / accounts.
The code has base attribute sets for known vendors matching the existing stock A/T JEDI template. Local modifications or vendors that are not represented may require either a change to values within the new EDI Attribute Set tables or new code.
Post tests, discrepancies, questions, etc. here.
Thanks to all.