To start the ball rolling, Sergi mentioned that brand could be represented as a product category.
Before even arguing that a brand could be represented as a category, categories would need to be a product attribute and not only an attribute on the template as it seems in order to do so … (same for the other two).
Otherwise, it is somewhat impossible to have standardised products produced by multiple manufacturers (possibly represented by multiple brand names or manufacturers) which is common in many industries. Such examples are extremely common in plumbing, electrical and electronic materiels.
Furthermore a brand has typically attributes itself (like owner and manufacturer(s)), so I fail to see the pertinence of restricting use to a category (though, in reality, nothing could nor should stop such practice).
Nan-tic seems to have a module trytond-product_brand but unfortunately it is based on the product template and not the product itself.
As to manufacturer, Nan-tic seems to have most of the pieces but doesn’t seem to have a
trytond-product_manufacturer.
It would be welcome to hear what others have to say about these topics.
It will be great if you can explain us the rational of this feature and the information that you need to store about each model
The product is part of the same categories of it’s template. For me, if you have two products of a diferent brand or manufacturer it does not make to create them under the same template because they are not related which each other.
In standardised parts (such as I mentioned for plumbing and electrical/electronic parts) there may be a number of brands/manufacturers that satisfy the product.
For example, in France, AFNOR has NF088 ( probably also available at least in part via ISO) which is list of Capillary solder fittings for copper tubes… http://cdn.afnor.org/download/produits/FR/NF088.pdf
Let’s take a female equal Tee (Té égal FFF) having model number 5130(old code 130CU), in standard variants of diameter 12mm; 14mm; 15mm; 16mm; 18mm; 22mm; and 28mm.
Comap, with their SUDO brand has a product for each of these variants (plus additional diameters) having manufacturer part number (mpn):
12mm=> 130012;
14mm=> 130014;
15mm=> 130015;
16mm=> 130016;
18mm=> 130018;
22mm=> 130022;
28mm=> 130018
et cetera
naturally each supplier has a product name & reference for each…
BOUTTE has a model number and a multiple variants mpn:
TS12: 12mm=> 3419453;
TS14: 14mm=> 3419460;
: 15mm=>
TS16: 16mm=> 3419477;
TS18: 18mm=> 3419484;
TS22: 22mm=> 3419507;
TS28: 28mm=> 3419514
et cetera
NB: BOUTTE has additional variants for each diameter variant with a GENCODE, as well as variants in different packaging for certain products, naturally with each supplier having a product name & reference for each…
And there are suppliers that distribute one or the other, or both (and/or others brands/manufacturers).
When we buy such tees, there is no differentiation between them in production, it comes down usually to purchase price. That is, in purchase and stock terms, they are all equivalent (in the same diameter variant).
So there will be, two sets of brand variants on the same template.
Currently, there seems to be no other way to do alternative products, which is another way to look at this extremely common situation in many or most industries, certainly not without complicating the inventory process.
Then it is the same product but you can purchase it on a diferent suppliers. As the part is standarised the brand and other properties may be a property of the lot (each lot number has it’s own properties).
One more reason to represent them as a single product in Tryton.
I must say I’m rather unfamiliar with allotment in purchasing (aside from auctions), though it does sound a bit heavy. Certainly must not have anything to do with a production lot.