A restaurant and a retail shop both sell products and take payments. That overlap makes a “universal POS” schema look tempting. It can also conceal the workflows that make each business different.
A restaurant order may be attached to a table, have guests and modifiers, produce kitchen tickets, move through preparation states, and depend on reservations or a waitlist. A retail sale typically has a different relationship to stock, product identifiers, and checkout. If one model has to represent both, it often grows a forest of nullable fields and conditional rules.
That is why OrderRestro and NodeDR’s retail POS are separate codebases. We still reuse patterns that genuinely travel well: authentication/session design, receipt rendering, ESC/POS printing, and careful currency rounding. The domain model stays separate because the operational concepts are not interchangeable.
This is not a rule that every product needs its own repository. It is a reminder to test the boundary before sharing a schema. Can each product express its normal workflow without fields that only make sense in the other domain? Do the invariants remain readable? Can a developer change one side without breaking the other’s assumptions?
The answers are easier to see when the model matches the business. OrderRestro’s modules and current scope are documented in its public repository; NodeDR’s product work is collected at RaktimRanjit.com.
Top comments (0)