When i use the button Copy to a new delivery note from a sales order the delivery (invoice) address is not shown. When i use the button Copy to a new delivery note from a sales invoice the invoice address is used for the delivery address. This is not consistent. I prefer that the invoice address is used (as a default) for the delivery address.
Partially true and partially not, but only because your terminology does not match the form. Sales orders have one field for a billing address and a separate field for delivery address. When copied to a delivery note, the delivery address is copied. This is because a delivery driver or warehouse person has no need for the billing address if a delivery address is available.
This is completely true and unavoidable, because sales invoices don’t have delivery addresses. They are billing documents. So if you adopt a workflow that requires information the program doesn’t have, it will use the next best thing.
If you don’t enter a delivery address on a Sales Order the address will be left blank on the Delivery Note. But if you create a delivery note from a Sales Invoice it uses the invoice address. So it would be logic that if the delivery address is left empty on a Sales Order use the ‘next best thing’ (the invoice address).
note: This is not meant as criticism, just trying to improve Manager (which love by the way, it’s huge, it’s great 
)
edit: When deleting a delivery note Manager shows an empty delivery note. I think i would be better that if you delete a delivery note Manager goes back to de index of the delivery notes.
Your logic makes some sense. I think the current behavior probably stems from the fact that delivery notes were added to the program later than sales orders and were envisioned to always follow from sales invoices. When some users expressed a need to deliver goods on sales orders before they could invoice, the capability to copy from sales orders was added. So the different behavior reflected different workflows.
Aside from mere consistency, what is the workflow you follow, and does the current situation actually cause problems? (If the program is changed, it will affect users who have been using it as is without complaint.)
Thank you
No, as i do some programming myself (as a hobbyist) my comment is meant to improve Manager. I know that it is hard to keep track of all the changes a new feature or adjustment can have in the entire program. So you have to see this comment as “beta-testing” so that small flaws found in Manager more easily can be corrected without a lot of “beta-testing” of @lubos. I personally would be glad with this kind of feedback because the searching and finding of these little flaws cost lots more time than the time needed to correct it. But if this kind of feedback is not appreciated, just let me know (no offence taken).
Since you are not experiencing a problem because of this behavior, I am not going to put this into the ideas category. None of the other thousands of users have commented and some of them might be adversely affected. The developer always has to consider backwards compatibility with records produced before any change.
I think you misunderstand. I’m not asking you to put my comment anywhere. I just noted a minor flaw in Manager and wanted to report this to @lubos. The developer can do whatever he seems fit with it. For me, since i don’t use delivery notes, i can do without the entire delivery note function.
I think you are misunderstanding me, @Frankie. You described Manager’s behavior as not consistent and as a flaw that needs to be corrected. You said logic suggests and you prefer different behavior. To me, that sounded like you thought something was wrong with Manager and were suggesting an improvement. Things like that, when thought to have merit and be technically feasible, are moved to the Ideas category by moderators for discussion by other forum members or to the Bugs category. Some of them get picked up for program changes by the developer. Bugs get fixed (or downgraded if the behavior turns out to be intentional for some reason).
I explained how and why things are as they are, so far as I understand. My purpose was to show that the behavior was not accidental but stemmed from envisioned workflow and usage. Since you don’t use the feature and those who do have not requested any changes, I was reluctant to move it to the Ideas category.