0
Category:
STATUS DETAILS

Comments

If this was added to the roadmap - the user would be ready to go after just adding a license and a security group in the AAD and thereby the task can be managed by only first level support. With +1000 users this is a big task to maintain.

Category:

I would like the validation NOT to be case sensitive, my customers don't like the upper case in the customer/vendor nave field.Also agree with Ricardo - make the accept function so it add the address data to the correct fields in the customer/vendor card.

Category:

This is already possible by using the Frequency 'Unlimited' and then create a period for example a year and then you can afterwards go into periods and split the periods like required.

Category:

We've had a few clients also comment about the same thing - the red asterisk on the PO is confusing for the user raising the PO. The above is a workable solution, or even if it was something on the Purchases & Payables Setup that would allow you to choose whether you want the field marked as mandatory/required.Most of our clients don't generate invoices from PO's, they only receipt the PO lines and then have solutions like Continia Document Capture to process their invoices, where they match to receipt lines.

Category:

It is also interesting that the behavior in the documents, both in headers and lines, is similar to the current global dimensions.

Category:

Why is this difficult to fix? Should be able to rely on those roll up fields

Category:

Would be great. No further feedback on this?

Category:

Good function on line level for both Sale picking as PO receive

Category:

And also consider adding a Tab in the Product information dialog that contains the Engineering attributes of the selected product version - this makes it available with two clicks in the context of most transactions.

Category:

Ideally this should be combined with a possibility to tag those attributes that are important for production or procurement, because there should not be ALL attributes shown there. Look at my LInkedIn Post "Using engineering attributes for specification management "! if you want to get more context on that.

Category:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 500