---
title: "What I am building right now."
description: "The Salesforce build for Doorvana, a garage door manufacturer running three lines of business: Field Service foundation, object model, and one revenue ledger."
source: "https://noconaconsulting.com/work/"
---

# What I am building right now.

Nocona Consulting documents engagements as they happen, rather than polishing them into case studies two years later. Each build log links back to the decisions behind it.

Worth stating plainly

Doorvana is not an arm's-length client. Doorvana's owner is also a co-owner of Nocona Consulting — two separate companies that share a person. That closeness is why these build logs can carry real metadata, real numbers and the decisions that went wrong, where a typical engagement would have client sign-off standing between you and the detail. It also means Doorvana is **not an independent reference**, and you should not weigh it as one.

## Doorvana

Garage door manufacturing, installation & service

In progress — discovery complete, build underway Not arm’s-length — shared owner

Three lines of business — Service, New Construction, and Wholesale — running on Salesforce Pro Suite with Jobber alongside it. Pro Suite hard-blocked Field Service, Apex, sandboxes, and most of the AppExchange, so every workaround made the next one worse.

-   **Service** — dispatch, repair, maintenance agreements
-   **New Construction** — builder schedules, staged installs
-   **Wholesale** — price lists, purchase orders, dealers

1.  01
    
    ### Edition & license scoping
    
    Established that Field Service is unreachable below Enterprise Edition and that no custom object arrangement substitutes for it — the managed package is hardwired to standard objects. Moved the org to Enterprise in September 2026.
    
2.  02
    
    ### Field Service foundation
    
    Modeled the full object chain — Work Order → Work Order Line Item → Service Appointment → Assigned Resource — plus the Products Consumed and Expenses costing layer.
    
3.  03
    
    ### Wholesale carve-out
    
    Wholesale never touches Field Service objects. Keeping it on the Opportunity/Order path prevents a class of reporting and licensing problems before they start.
    
4.  04
    
    ### Single revenue ledger
    
    Opportunity is what was booked; Work Order is what was performed; both converge on Order and Order Products. Never summed together — that rule is the guardrail against double-counted revenue.
    
5.  05
    
    ### Metadata in source control
    
    The org lives in an SFDX project under git, profiles tracked in source, with a manifest-driven retrieve so nothing changes invisibly in production.
    

[Read the build log: one revenue ledger](https://noconaconsulting.com/blog/one-revenue-ledger/)

Outside client engagements will be listed here as they wrap, and those will come with references you can actually call. Until then, what is on this page is our own org — judged on the work, not on someone else's word for it.

## FAQ

### What is the Doorvana Salesforce project?

Doorvana is a garage door manufacturer, installer, and service company running three lines of business — Service, New Construction, and Wholesale — through one Salesforce org. Nocona Consulting handled the move from Salesforce Pro Suite to Enterprise Edition to unblock Field Service, designed the Field Service object model, carved Wholesale out of Field Service entirely, and established a single revenue ledger on Order and Order Products.

### Why should wholesale stay off Field Service objects?

A wholesale line of business sells product to dealers: there is no crew, no truck, and no service appointment to schedule. Putting wholesale orders on Work Orders means paying Field Service licenses for people who never dispatch anything, maintaining scheduling objects with nothing to schedule, and adding a permanent exception to every operational report. Keeping wholesale on the Opportunity and Order path is cheaper in licensing, simpler in reporting, and easier to maintain.

### Is Doorvana an independent client of Nocona Consulting?

No, and it is worth being direct about it. Doorvana's owner is also a co-owner of Nocona Consulting. They are two separate companies — Nocona Consulting has no ownership stake in Doorvana — but the engagement is not arm's-length, so it should not be weighed as independent proof. What it is good for is detail: the build logs carry real metadata and real mistakes because there is no client sign-off standing in the way.

### Can I speak to a reference from a past client?

Not yet. Doorvana is the current engagement and it is not an arm's-length one, so offering it as a reference would be misleading. Once outside engagements wrap, references will be available and will be named as such. In the meantime the build logs are the evidence on offer — they show the actual reasoning and the actual metadata rather than a testimonial.