It's a VB technique. This is an example from Job Entry:
Sub InitializeCustomCode()
'// ** Wizard Insert Location - Do not delete
'Begin/End Wizard Added Variable Intialization' lines **
'// Begin Wizard Added Variable Intialization
'// End Wizard Added Variable Intialization
'// Begin Custom Method Calls
'// End Custom Method Calls
SetExtendedProps() 'add this subroutine call in Init custom code
End Sub
...then create your SetExtendedProps() sub:
Private Sub SetExtendedProps()
Dim edvJO As EpiDataView = CType(oTrans.EpiDataViews("JobOper"), EpiDataView)
If edvJO.dataView.Table.Columns.Contains("OpComplete") Then
edvJO.dataView.Table.Columns("OpComplete").ExtendedProperties("ReadOnly") = False
End If
End Sub
In this case, if the JobOper table exists (Job Entry is open & functioning), the OpComplete field (normally non-editable in Job Entry - not even displayed in fact if I recall) is now set to Read-Only false so our schedulers can force an OP close (perhaps short qty as a result of labor entry foul ups).
You can apply the technique to just about any field in any app. ***Will not over-ride field level user security you may have set up however!
Very handy technique (and can be applied to more field 'properties' than just read-only.)
Hope that helps!
Rob
Sub InitializeCustomCode()
'// ** Wizard Insert Location - Do not delete
'Begin/End Wizard Added Variable Intialization' lines **
'// Begin Wizard Added Variable Intialization
'// End Wizard Added Variable Intialization
'// Begin Custom Method Calls
'// End Custom Method Calls
SetExtendedProps() 'add this subroutine call in Init custom code
End Sub
...then create your SetExtendedProps() sub:
Private Sub SetExtendedProps()
Dim edvJO As EpiDataView = CType(oTrans.EpiDataViews("JobOper"), EpiDataView)
If edvJO.dataView.Table.Columns.Contains("OpComplete") Then
edvJO.dataView.Table.Columns("OpComplete").ExtendedProperties("ReadOnly") = False
End If
End Sub
In this case, if the JobOper table exists (Job Entry is open & functioning), the OpComplete field (normally non-editable in Job Entry - not even displayed in fact if I recall) is now set to Read-Only false so our schedulers can force an OP close (perhaps short qty as a result of labor entry foul ups).
You can apply the technique to just about any field in any app. ***Will not over-ride field level user security you may have set up however!
Very handy technique (and can be applied to more field 'properties' than just read-only.)
Hope that helps!
Rob
--- On Wed, 2/18/09, Andrew Best <abest@...> wrote:
From: Andrew Best <abest@...>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 3:29 PM
Rob - What does this mean "you tried setting extended properties on the
'days out' job field so that read only - false" I am not sure what you
are speaking of.
Regards,
Andrew Best
Kice Industries, Inc.
P(316)744-7151
F(316)295-2412
From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 1:49 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
Andrew: Have you tried setting extended properties on the 'days out' job
field so that read only - false?
That would allow you to edit individual job details to match your
subcontract desires.
Note: Once you place the linked subcontract PO, the PO due date SHOULD
become the end date for the subcontract OP.
If it's not, something else might be amiss in you config or data.
Rob
--- On Mon, 2/16/09, Andrew Best <abest@...
<mailto:abest% 40kice.com> > wrote:
From: Andrew Best <abest@... <mailto:abest% 40kice.com> >
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com <mailto:vantage% 40yahoogroups. com>
Date: Monday, February 16, 2009, 12:59 PM
What would be nice is that if Vantage allowed the user to manipulate the
Queue time per job. Syteline made scheduling extremely flexible by
allowing the queue and move to be changed on each job. It made
scheduling around the bottlenecks much easier.
It would also help on OP's when you rush an order from a supplier.
Normally Chrome takes 2 weeks, but we can have it done in a week or even
less if needed.
Regards,
Andrew Best
Kice Industries, Inc.
P
F
From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@ yahoogroups .com] On
Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 3:39 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
Neat trick Andrew.
Our legacy system (Profitkey) essentially handled it like that.
Difference being I could actually specify the 'material' detail as a
"S"ervice.
So far we're living with the paradigm shift (after realizing too late
that there is no Time Phase like netting view of subcontract services
that planners & buyers are so used to using - so our IT wizards
developed a subcontract PO web tool).
If the winds ever blow towards making a change I'll remember your
method.
Thanks.
Rob
--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Andrew Best <abest@...
<mailto:abest% 40kice.com>
<mailto:abest% 40kice.com> > wrote:
From: Andrew Best <abest@... <mailto:abest% 40kice.com>
<mailto:abest% 40kice.com> >
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com <mailto:vantage% 40yahoogroups. com>
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:00 AM
I did not like the Subcontract PO process with Vantage. I found it much
easier to just purchase our subcontract OP's on Purchase direct PO's and
use the resource Queue time to allow for the OP lead time. But I think
it depends on the nature of your business and your subcontract OP as to
whether the canned Vantage method will work best.
Regards,
Andrew Best
Kice Industries, Inc.
P
F
From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@ yahoogroups .com] On
Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Monday, February 09, :42 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
Far be it from me to argue with the Support Gods at Epicor, but I think
they've been sipping too much of their Sales Group's psychodelic
Kool-Aid.
If you look in depth at the multi-table data-structures of Methods (and
very similar structures when those methods are generated and scheduled
as Job Details), you'll find subcontract OPs (at method level and as a
job detail UNTIL you actual create and link a PO to the subcontract OP)
are totally schedule offset by the 'days out' value in the method.
Once you create a linked subcontract PO to a scheduled subcontract OP,
the 'days out' value that acted as a scheduling offset previously (for
subcontract OP start/end dates) is replaced entirely by the PO Entry
date (start) and linked PO/line/release due date.
These PO linked subcontract OPs effectively become locked to the
scheduler (just as if you were configured to not reschedule in-process
OPs)... The scheduler just does its best to maintain your defined OP to
OP sequence directions (finish-start for serial OPs & start-start or
finish to finish for parallel defined OPs) within the bounds of your
defining/controllin g subcontract PO dates.
Vantage has bug maintaining these defined OP sequences (SCR just created
as a result of 5 months of working through supports pat 'working as
designed' answers and us refusing to go away.
The fix for that isn't going to be out until 408 (which I expect in
reality means 409).
All that said, the global & MRP are not a single process and don't work
together in the way suggested: That scheduling would LIKE a subcontract
OP with a linked PO to be moved - but it can't by the very nature of the
data structures involved - So MRP cannot possibly 'see' that (post
schedule) the perfectly aligned subcontract PO to subcontract OP
requires some PO change message.
Vantage's MRP is already about as weak as they come - so the notion that
they are going to get it to do as suggested with these 2 SCR's you
mention is unlikely. To do so will require a not yet existing
scheduling/MRP bridging processer (and supporting data structures) to
provide the behavior you are looking for.
Frankly, I hope they don't try it as it will almost assuredly create new
wonderful bugs within the Global and MRP.
I (for one) would be happy if they just eliminate the existing bugs so
we could count on reliable, repetitive behavior (ideal or not).
Don't get me wrong - I'd LOVE such a feature (only I'd like to be able
to control WHEN it is to be invoke). We have thousands of short duration
subcontract OPs for quick plating/anodizing/ etc., processes which, once
PO linked, in our business I'd like to STAY locked and not bother people
with non-value added messages. We also have VERY long lead time
subcontract OPs where the behavior you describe would be useful.
I'm not trusting enough (based on Epicor's track record), that they
wouldn't screw one desireable behavior up in 'fixing' (really enhancing)
behavior for the other types.
Curious to know which release they plan to implement these SCRs when you
find out.
We'll definitely have to do some heavy piloting to test this behavior
again when that release is available before risk our business going live
on it.
(If they do manage to do it, I hope it resolves your process issues.)
Thanks for the tip Jessi... It's nice to get a heads up on potential
future changes that might have such a big impact on our business.
Any additonal info you learned would be greatly appreciated if you would
pass it on.
Thanks
Rob
--- On Mon, 2/9/09, Jessi Utecht <jessi.utecht@ yahoo.com
<mailto:jessi. utecht%40yahoo. com> > wrote:
From: Jessi Utecht <jessi.utecht@ yahoo.com
<mailto:jessi. utecht%40yahoo. com> >
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com <mailto:vantage% 40yahoogroups. com>
Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 1:25 PM
Just got confirmation from Epicor that this is a bug and that there are
2 different SCR #'s for this issue.
Just waiting to get the information from Epicor what the SCR#'s are and
when they will be released.
____________ _________ _________ __
From: Jessi Utecht <jessi.utecht@ yahoo.com>
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Sent: Monday, February 9, :08:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
Rob,
Thanks for the rather intersting information.
Appreciate your help
____________ _________ _________ __
From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ yahoo.com>
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Sent: Monday, February 9, :56:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
That's as designed (and how nearly every system I've ever seen works
with subcontract/ outside service PO/OPs).
Rather than delete your linked POs, why isn't your job Scheduler/Planner
just communicating to the Buyer the need to change the PO schedule (and
doing so if possible after checking with vendor - or NOT doing so and
leaving the job schedule intact if unable to change)?
(Some things are better to do via talk/email versu relying upon some
self delusional capacity model driven system job schedule messages.)
Rob
--- On Mon, 2/9/09, Jessi Utecht <jessi.utecht@ yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Jessi Utecht <jessi.utecht@ yahoo.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Subcontracting POS
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 10:28 AM
We have found that our Subcontracing PO's are driving the dates when our
jobs are being rescheduled instead of the reschedule of the job creating
a rescheduling message to more out the P.O. datein or out. The only
way around it is to go to the subcontracting P.O., delete the items off
of it, reschedule the job, then reinsert the items back into the P.O.
Has anyone else ever experienced this or know if this is fixed in a
future release?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]