Frideas! - 2/14/2025 - 💘

[Ryan.Kappel]

Log In - Epicor Identity - a few related Ideas out there on this, here’s mine.

There’s a thread here also:

Auto Width Columns in Application Studio Grid

I have deployed a dashboard to Application Studio. The dashboard has 2 BAQs. I would like to have the columns in the dashboard grids to be auto sized to the content (or the header). As it is, some of my fields fall off the right side of the form. There is plenty of room to fit them all if they were auto sized. I had a look through Hanna’s Kinetic Control Compendium - Experts’ Corner - Epicor User Help Forum, but I didn’t find this answer.

[timshuwy (Tim Shoemaker)]

@aosemwengie1

the odds they do anything with this idea are 0.0%

Hey… dont be so negative… we literally have discussed this idea the past two releases for scoping… but the discussions have followed much the same path as has been discussed here. We don’t want to add confusion, but we DO want clarity in what the Pull as assembly, plan as assembly, Purchase Direct, Make Direct, Non-Stock, Non-Quantity bearing, and phantoms all mean, and how they interrelate. if we just go and change this, it could make what already works and what everyone understands become confusing.

So… while we again discussed this for 2025.2, it is still not “in development” because we dont have a great answer, and dont want to cause confusion. Someday, we will either mark this idea as “in development”, or as an idea that we will not be doing.

[d_inman (David Inman)]

I did some brief testing with this field a few years ago at a previous company (so 2022.x.x, I think) and found it to not behave like you think it would and/or not consistently. I don’t recall exactly what I found with it that I didn’t like, but it seemed like one of those “use at your own risk” type of settings.

[jkane (John Kane)]

I also remember it being wonky.

[jkane (John Kane)]

@timshuwy

but we DO want clarity

Already exists in the Technical Reference Guides.

[aosemwengie1 (Alisa Osemwengie)]

Yes and no. You cannot use nonstock with source type transfer and I was not able to find this clearly explained anywhere.

[kananga (John K)]

@jkane

Already exists in the Technical Reference Guides

I pop in and download any new documentation as it appears, organized by major and minor version. At a glance, version 2024 is associated with 117 distinct reference guides, 53 of which have been modified for 2024.2.

Control-F usually works out if you’re in the right document. Sometimes it’s more efficient to install WSL, sudo apt install pdfgrep, figure out how that works, then grep all the docs that you’ve copied to your own storage.

[dylanb (Dylan Benner)]

Add Lot # to Material Request Applications – this is to add a Lot field to all the material request/ inventory request applications as an optional field to support shade lot matching/ tracking efforts and have the selected lot # appear on the material request queue.

Undo Operation/ Job Batches – we utilize job batching pretty heavily, and when a mistake is made, the only recourse is to close all the affected jobs and re-run MRP for new unfirm suggestions – not fun, and time consuming. We should have the ability to undo batches and return the jobs back to their original state assuming no transactions have been made against them.

[kananga (John K)]

Here’s a good one:

Allow help to be accessed externally

With increasing mass of documentation migrating to Zendesk online help, technical references are losing relevancy and are falling out of date.

Searching from the Kinetic client or within the Zendesk portal doesn’t produce results specific enough to reliably be relevant. The online help search does not recognize search term arguments. Targeting a search to site:erphelp113100.zendesk.com in a search engine that respects search term arguments would be extremely useful.

For example, the quotes around “auto consume stock” are a search term that mean I want to match that phrase, not every possible etymological construct, synonym, or Levenshtein distance <= 5 of “auto” and/or “consume” and/or “stock”.

[JasonMcD (Jason McDermott)]

Just added this. It existed in Classic but not in Kinetic.

Add Fiscal Year and Period functions to Kinetic BAQ designer

You can still do this in Kinetic, but there is no place to select it.

[timshuwy (Tim Shoemaker)]

New idea for you to consider:
Apply SNAP Programming interface to BPM logic - KIN-I-6081

[josecgomez]

haha sorry Tim im’ on this one. BPMS are FINE!!! don’t touch it!!!

Programming via mouse click and widget is THE WORST

Visual Programming is slow and inefficient. Leave BPMs alone, if you add this in please have an option that says I know what I am doing and it makes all this go away and lets you go back to writing BPMs the way we do them today.

Unpopular Opinion Perhaps: Visual Programming doesn’t make programming more accessible to less technical people, it makes technical people more frustrated and puts a powerful (read dangerous) tool in the hands of individuals that are generally not qualified to do so. There should be a non trivial learning curve to modifying core Method Logic

[Evan_Purdy]

If you click on his idea, its only about replacing the current BPM diagrams with these, not code, as far as I can tell.

Still, its a waste of dev time when we have so many worse issues to deal with.

[jgiese.wci (Joshua Giese)]

In replacement for normal widget building i’m down with it, but for c# replacement please no.

[jgehling (Jeff Gehling)]

Make this an option for users, but still keep the c# code, but there are way more core UI bugs and heavily voted on features that need to be addressed first.

[josecgomez]

@Evan_Purdy

its only about replacing the current BPM diagrams with these, not code, as far as I can tell.

I might be overthinking it, but it seems like with App Studio they replaced a complex product with a steep learning curve with a crippled, “more accessible” version to help the masses.

The masses still can’t use it, and now those of us with technical know-how have to jump through endless hoops for trivial tasks.

If they want to improve the BPM Editor embeding VS Code with auto complete and copilot would be much better received

[Mark_Wonsil]

I see loops on the legend, so if it brings loops to the current widget world, I’m for it.

[Hally (Simon Hall)]

@aosemwengie1

I believe the problem is that it isn’t clear all the different behaviors that are driven from that checkbox and there is huge room for improvement.

1000% Agree. I always have to go back and remind myself.

[Hally (Simon Hall)]

@jkane

you need to read the MRP Technical Reference Guide

In conjuncton with notebooklm

[Banderson (Brandon Anderson)]

@Mark_Wonsil

I see loops on the legend, so if it brings loops to the current widget world,

Or… (Now hear me out)… Just add a “loop” function/widget to the current toolset. That should be easier than shoe-horning in a whole new system.

Please stop “fixing things” that aren’t broken…