2024 07 30 13 05 11

Summary

The transcript discusses the unreliability of a 'status' column in a system and the need for a general recapitulation of validation rules for items in various stages of processing. The speaker expresses concern about assigning a task to someone who is not well-documented and fears being used against them. The focus then shifts to understanding the current rules for bringing data to the 'preview' screen and the need to document these rules for clarity. A bug is identified where items approved for billing do not update their status correctly, leading to a discrepancy between the expected and actual status of items, which is critical for tracking and correcting in the system.

Takeaways

• 😕 The 'status' column is not reliable, which is a concern for tracking and validation processes.
• 📋 There is a need for a general recapitulation of all validation rules, both for item accounting and other points.
• 👤 A task was assigned to someone referred to as 'Senhor', who is described as being very cautious and not having everything documented yet.
• 💼 The speaker is concerned about the 'Senhor' using the lack of written details against them, indicating a need for documentation.
• 🔍 The speaker is trying to write down the validation rules but needs support to understand and act together with the 'Senhor'.
• 📝 The idea is to change the rule from looking at the 'status' to working with the concept of 'ind', which seems to be a key term.
• 📑 There is a mention of documenting these rules, suggesting that this is an important step for clarity and consistency.
• 🔢 The script discusses the handling of financial stimuli within a certain movement that has not been invoiced, indicating a focus on pre-invoice processes.
• 🚫 The speaker mentions a bug related to the status update not reflecting correctly after items have been approved for invoicing.
• 📊 There is a significant discrepancy in the status counts, with 150 million in status 1 and 250 million in status 3, but none in status 4 as expected.
• 🛠️ The speaker suggests that the status column should no longer be the focal point of support and proposes finding another way to validate without relying on it.

Q & A

What is the main concern discussed in the script regarding the 'status' column?

The main concern is that the 'status' column is not reliable for tracking the progress of items through the billing process, as it does not accurately reflect whether items have been billed or not.

Why is the speaker worried about assigning the task to the 'Senhor'?

The speaker is worried because the 'Senhor' is described as being very meticulous and might use the lack of written details against the speaker, potentially leading to conflict.

What is the purpose of the 'preview' screen mentioned in the script?

The 'preview' screen is meant to display all sets of items with financial stimulus within a certain movement that has not yet been billed, serving as a pre-billing overview.

What is the issue with the current rule for bringing data to the 'preview' screen?

The current rule is flawed because it does not properly update the status of items after they have been approved for billing, leading to a mismatch in the expected status updates.

What does the speaker suggest as an alternative to relying on the 'status' column?

The speaker suggests revisiting and updating the rules and queries to ensure that the 'preview' screen accurately reflects items that have not been billed, without relying on the 'status' column.

What is the significance of the numbers '1', '3', and '4' in the context of the script?

These numbers represent different statuses in the billing process: '1' for items ready for billing, '3' for items approved by the partner for billing, and '4' for items that have been billed.

Why is the speaker concerned about the large number of items in status '1' and '3'?

The speaker is concerned because the large numbers indicate a potential issue with the billing process, as no items have moved to status '4', suggesting a bottleneck or error in the system.

What is the speaker's plan to address the issue with the 'status' column?

The speaker plans to document the current rules and queries, and then work on creating new rules that do not rely on the 'status' column, ensuring a more accurate representation of the billing process.

What is the role of the 'Senhor' in resolving the issue discussed in the script?

The 'Senhor' is expected to initiate the investigation and validation of the rules while the speaker is documenting them, working together to understand and correct the issue.

What is the speaker's strategy for documenting the rules and queries?

The speaker intends to write down the necessary validations and updates, ensuring that the documentation is clear and comprehensive to facilitate understanding and resolution of the issue.

How does the speaker plan to communicate and resolve doubts with the 'Senhor'?

The speaker plans to communicate through messages and work together with the 'Senhor' to address any doubts or issues that arise during the process of resolving the billing problem.