ES3-KULA

An order confirmation did not always become one invoice paid in one step. Finance needed to choose invoice items and quantities, apply their discounts and taxes, publish the document with payment and shipping details, record partial receipts, and keep the parent order's invoice state understandable.

I implemented the invoice feature from listing and creation through payment and reporting. Item quantity changes recalculated subtotal, discount, tax, and amount before updating invoice totals. Publishing required the relevant invoice number, customer purchase-order reference, payment method, and shipping data.

The payment path recorded customer receipts, rejected an amount that exceeded the remaining invoice balance, and marked the invoice fully paid when receipts reached the total. Sending, cancellation, and partial-versus-complete invoice states also propagated back to the order confirmation. Published invoices could produce PDF documents and an internal sales order carrying the same customer, payment, and shipping context.

Finance could record partial receipts without exceeding the remaining invoice balance, and reaching the total marked the invoice as paid. I entered receipts against a real invoice on both sides of that boundary. An amount above the remaining balance was rejected. An amount matching it exactly was accepted. A guard that only ever refused large receipts would have failed that second case. Invoice state propagated to the parent confirmation, while a published invoice carried the same customer, payment, and shipping context into its internal sales order.

The original IT issue flow assumed one assigned technician. Some incidents required several people, while access checks, activity history, notifications, filters, and closed-issue reports still needed to describe who was actively responsible.

I built the issue and repair-reporting slice, including creation, assignment, responses, attachments, activity records, notifications, and localized interfaces. I later changed assignment to a many-to-many relation, migrated the existing assignment data, and updated the API and interfaces to use active assignees.

I also extended the closed-issue report and spreadsheet export with assignees, repair action, data-loss status, opened and closed dates, duration, priority-based SLA status, and user rating.

One issue could carry several active technicians without losing its reporter, activity, repair, or reporting context. After the migration I compared row counts before and after, spot-checked existing issues for their original assignee, and opened a closed issue to see whether its history had survived. It had. Open issues were the ones anyone would check; the closed ones were where a silent loss would have sat unnoticed. Operational exports represented the same assignment model used by the application.

Sales quotations already contained customer, salesperson, item, tax, discount, shipping, and validity data. Order confirmation needed to reuse that work while preventing expired or already-attached quotations from being treated as new input.

I contributed to the existing order-confirmation workflow and implemented much of its newer API surface. The setup path filtered valid deal quotations, grouped the selected records under a draft confirmation, copied their items, and recalculated payment data. The interface exposed quotation validity and let staff select or adjust confirmation items before publishing.

Publishing then recorded finance and change notes and set the confirmation to waiting or approved according to whether the expected quotation items had been selected.

Staff could move selected quotation data into one confirmation while retaining the customer, salesperson, item, pricing, and validity context needed by the invoice workflow that followed.