On Friday, it’s EpiUsers Frideas Day! Have you been to the Epicor Ideas Portal recently? If so, are there some ideas you want to encourage other users to vote for? Maybe want to add comments to an existing idea?
Here’s a new one I just entered because it has come up many times on this forum…
Add Ability (Option) to Add a Custom Layer to All App-Open Events - KIN-I-6053
Summary: Example of the pain point… I apply a custom layer to Quote Entry (most of us probably have). However, any form in the system (Case Entry was the latest one I helped with) that has an app-open event to access Quote Entry defaults to only loading the base Quote Entry form. Therefore Case Entry (and any other form in the system that has an app-open event to access Quote Entry) must then also be customized.
Customizing one form ends up requiring the creation and maintenance of customizations on several others forms just to access it.
Not mine but great ideas!
Kinetic 2025.2 - The Boring Edition
There should be a place where we can Vote for different support Problems
Here are the four Ideas I have open:
Ability to use Deposit Billing/Payment with Project Billing types
Add Memo Types for PO Line and Release
Re-enable Ice.Bpm.InfoMessageDisplayMode.Grid option in Kinetic UI
Ability to mark Operation as Inactive
Kinetic BAQ: Allow typing a field name in criteria
https://epicor-manufacturing.ideas.aha.io/ideas/KIN-I-6055
Nobody wants to scroll hundreds of fields trying to peer through a six-field window with no relative feedback to find the one they’re looking for. I’d rather type in my field’s name because I know what it is and use the time saved for other things.
ive hated this “feature” for years…you’ve got my vote!
In classic, for a customisation I go through and ensure that any menus that open the same form are using the same customisation to prevent that sort of behaviour.
If I am understanding your idea this is similar problem, but when you click on (For example quote from Case entry) it is not respecting the layer applied to the related menu?
One could argue that’s a reason for a new revision of the MOM
It it funny in classic BAQs when you go to display fields and put the order of the tree in alpha you can enter the first letter to at least get you to that point.
Is that what you were meaning?
Sure, but that doesn’t stop someone from re-using an Operation that’s outdated and that you don’t want being used on MoMs.
I, misunderstood and 100% agree. How do you think it should behave if you tried to make the op inactive globally have it check any approved MOMs with that op on it and notify? Or were you just meaning make the Operation inactive on an individual MOM?
There are also quite a number of base data that could benefit with the same treatment, like reason codes for example.
@kananga @Joe_Tahan @Hally
In the new BAQ process I have found building a formula easier now because I can search for both fields and functions just by keying in the a portion of the field name.
It is not.
Here’s the post that basically stemmed the idea, but this is probably the 5th or 6th person that I’ve personally helped with… and I’ve seen others helping with this same issue as well:
The main issue (in this example) is opening Quote Entry from Case Entry is being driven by Application Studio events. So, even if you have a custom layer on Quote Entry in Menu Maintenance, the App Studio event calls the base form only.
I won’t re-write the whole situation here, but it is in the above linked post if you want more details.
well you can always do what we did when we were in our learning years of e10…add "DO NOT USE - " to the op description…people dont like seeing that on printed travelers.
I can type it, is this not what you want?
Not on this end… For example, referencing JobOper, if I type the letter ‘o’, ‘OpComplete’ in the visible content is ignored and ‘Company’ is suggested:
If I add a ‘p’ after the ‘o’, ‘OpComplete’ is still not found, instead all combobox data is deleted by the failed search:
If I clear the text I entered, the combobox fails to recover its data:
i see, so this is Subquery, not table criteria. You should mention it there.
Also did you try to submit it as a bug?
Oh, yeah, that’s what we did, too (this was at a previous company when I input the idea), but I have a pet peeve for unsightly data that’s sole purpose is to stop someone from doing something with it that is unwanted.
ohh yea there was a big cleanup later in the life of epicor for my company. We started trying to fix things instead of put bandaids and sticky notes all over epicor because of our previous shortcomings. You live and you learn
Garbage in…garbage out