Need some help brainstorming on this one… any ideas or suggestions are welcome.
There is a problem PRB0211362, that documents a bug where po suggestion comments are not being combined when two or more po suggestions for a part-on-the-fly are combined into one PO Line and listed as releases.
For example there are two po suggestions:
PO Suggestion: 123 Job: 123 Material: PartOnTheFly. Suggestion Comment: “This is the comment for Job123” PO Suggestion: 124 Job: 124Material: PartOnTheFly Suggestion Comment: “This is the comment for Job124”.
We would expect one po and one poline to be created and for both of the comments to be combined like it does for normal parts (non part-on-the-fly).
Instead the comment for the first part comes in and the second one is left behind. Epicor told us the workaround is to generate the PO and then go into the PO and re-type the comments.
In short, we don’t like this workaround, but I don’t have any ideas on how to fix it on our own via customization or something else. Maybe the workaround they gave is the best way to move forward.
I’m thinking of bpms similar to ours where we store original PO suggestion number in the PO release UD data. Now, you’ll be doing different things with your data, but I think method might work.
We have two data directives, one on in-transaction on SugPoDtl to get and store the suggestion number, then we have another in-transaction on PORel to see if my PO release update is coming from POSuggEntry and if so, stick the stored Sugg num from the BPM data field into the release data and then clear out the BPM Data field. Whaddya think?
I used a “technique” from @josecgomez in the thread below to move info from my suggestions to PO. I used a UD table as the temp location during generation, but bpmCallContext.Character01 for the comment and Number01, Number02 for line and release could work.
Then the first one’s condition is fairly basic on the PO suggestion, just looking at then my changed row has a sugg num, which any new one will have I think:
It doesn’t issue a separate PO though… It combines the parts on one PO like it should, but leaves out the comment from the second suggestion and just keeps the first. Then we have to go back in and find the PO to re-write the comment.
