Summary for Non-Technical Readers

Week ten showed that RZP is starting to move from "we have screens" toward "real work is happening behind those screens." In previous weeks, a lot of attention went into form fidelity, menus, and user-interface behavior. Now other parts that matter even more to users have been added: accounting-data import, the foundations of distribution, search, settings, codebooks, and testing.

This is not just another batch of technical commits. RZP is a module where users need to work with data, run checks, delete only what is allowed to be deleted, and eventually produce outputs and reports. The team has therefore started to connect three layers more tightly: the appearance of forms, application logic, and automated verification that the new behavior stays aligned with the original Fenix.

There was also a major shift in quality and infrastructure. More targeted tests were added for forms, presenters, search, import, and distribution. The reporting layer in SPOL received a shared service for the lifecycle of the helper database NeoFenixpom.mdb, so modules do not create their own local substitutes. This matters for RZP, and also for future modules that will need the same kind of output infrastructure.

The week therefore builds on the earlier lesson about user-interface migration. Visual parity remains necessary, but it is not enough by itself. Week ten added more emphasis on making forms part of real work scenarios, connecting them properly to data, and making them continuously verifiable through tests.

What Happened

The week's history covers May 11, 2026 to May 17, 2026; origin/develop contains 29 merge commits for that period. Activity was concentrated mainly between May 11 and May 15. Most of the work remained in RZP, but a new step in the shared SPOL layer also had an important impact.

The first major line was the continuation of the RZP-S01 master-data area. Work continued on forms for definition sentences, cost and revenue accounts, owners, settings, and codebooks. For accounts and definitions, the team worked on the combination of visual parity, application logic, and the data layer: Dapper repositories, use cases, presenters, tests, and detailed UI parity checks. Owner maintenance received fixes around the detail form, duplicate columns in search, DPI behavior, and top-menu items.

Search also made an important step forward. The standalone SearchDialog was unified into one production MDI-child path through RzpSearchDialogRunner. That means current caller forms no longer each have their own modal search path, but instead use one common mechanism. For users, the point is that search should behave the same across owners, accounts, definitions, and codebooks. For the team, the point is that such a mechanism is easier to test and maintain.

At the same time, the UI conversion itself continued to improve. The VB6 -> .NET WinForms migration skill received more rules for layout, DPI, minimize and maximize behavior, dynamic menus, MDI mode, and business-logic wiring. Fixes such as "codebook menus must load on startup," "the menu must react to the selected owner," or "search should be a subform, not a modal dialog" may look like individual details, but together they reduce the risk that the new application merely looks similar while behaving differently in actual work.

The second major line was RZP-S03, covering import and distribution. On the backend side, use cases and repositories were added or extended for accounting-data import, reading from UCR, working with imported periods, and multi-level distribution. The distribution part already accounts for copying level 0 to level 1, applying the KAM distribution algorithm, zeroing source rows, and enforcing the rule that only the last distribution level can be deleted.

For RZP, this is a significant milestone. Form parity is visible immediately, but the real value of the module lies in rules like these: what may be imported, when a period is closed, how amounts are distributed, and how dangerous deletion of intermediate state is prevented. The implementation also includes structured operation results, mapping of states such as Success, LockTimeout, Deadlock, and ValidationFailed, and structured logging with a correlation identifier.

On the S03 UI side, conversion of the import and distribution chain began. The first part is ImportCodebookForm, the form for the list of received accounting data. The legacy rzp_pric.frm became a new WinForms screen with an MDI menu shell, connection to ImportPresenter, keyboard behavior, a help topic, print menu wiring, and tests that guard against introducing a new dashboard or merged wizard. The important point is that the team did not rewrite the original five-form flow into one new screen; it kept the original separation of work situations.

The third major line was reporting infrastructure in SPOL-S16. The team froze the shared lifecycle for the helper database NeoFenixpom.mdb: the template comes from the installation DataPath, a runtime copy is created per session under %TEMP%\Fenix\, the service can reconnect to the same file, and cleanup runs on shutdown. SPOL owns the file lifecycle, while the schema and data inside the MDB remain the responsibility of the concrete module. This is exactly the kind of boundary that must be clear in a migration, otherwise every module starts solving the same problem in its own way.

This step also corrected the direction taken by the first .NET implementation, where RZP bootstrapped its own local blank.mdb. The new contract says a downstream module should use IReportPomMdbSessionManager, not its own environment variable or local helper-database copy. SPOL-S16 is documented as a completed step, with targeted tests for lifecycle, parity, and compatibility, and with a 391/391 SPOL regression result.

Verification also grew substantially. For RZP-S01, the evidence includes targeted tests for the search dialog, unified MDI-child search flow, and full RZP runs with skips where the parity baseline is still missing. For RZP-S03, targeted tests ran for ImportCodebookForm, and the full RZP suite reported 480/484 with 4 skips and no failures. The distribution part has unit tests for calculation, delete guard, save-state mapping, and logging; the parity test remains skipped for now because it is waiting for a golden baseline from legacy data.

Week ten therefore moved the project into a more practical phase. RZP is no longer just a collection of converted forms and shared building blocks. A verifiable chain of work is starting to appear: the user opens a form, selects data, runs an action, the application applies rules against the database, returns a concrete state, and tests check that the behavior has not fallen apart. The finish line is still far away, but this change is fundamental for the migration.

Home