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?
Happy time off to them I’m guessing! Or socked in with year end workload? Such is the life.
Don’t overwrite user input with default values - You know when you’re cruising along in the web client and something finally loads, triggering some code that repopulates input default values and overwrites your work? If not, PSA. If so, maybe one of the variety of static HTML or CSS initial value attributes might be a little less disruptive.
Now to really open a can of worms. No one will read this on Friday afternoon on December 27, but I want to vent. I may repost this in 2025… Maybe it’s already been said, many times, many ways…
So, in Part Entry, in the settings for a site, you can enter:
Supplier
Min Order Qty
Lot multiple
Lead Time, etc.
But these are a family of variables. They depend on the supplier.
If you change suppliers, you better remember to change all other settings in tandem.
But why?
Why isn’t this embedded in Supplier Price List? (Lead time is, but that’s it)
Why isn’t the list of suppliers (via SPL) a selectable grid in Part Entry? (Rather than manually rekeying the data.)
a. Then you could also look at the suppliers at a glance and see who is approved and their lead time, etc.
[Edit]
Also, I’d love to see the PartPlant fields grayed out if you select a supplier that has a part in the SPL.
Like, it’s pretty obscure to know that SPL lead time overrides PartPlant lead time.
Really, there just shouldn’t be a PartPlant lead time. Like I say, it depends on the supplier.
The issue (not really) is that manufactured parts use some these settings, too.
But in that event, it would be nice if one of the “suppliers” could be “us.”
Well honestly I didn’t look to see if this is an idea already, or if it was discussed on this site and shot down due to being a bad idea or exists already, etc.
I think the only detail you may be missing is that the planning parameters are site specific. But supplier price lists are NOT site specific. What is really needed here in my opinion is a full redesign of supplier price list so that it is a true price list that is attached to a PartPlant record. Not the way it is now where each record just floats around, not anchored to any list, just with an association to a part (not a site) and a supplier.
