0

on
Category:
STATUS DETAILS

Comments

RE:

Ian McQuade on 10/27/2022 5:56:05 PM

Hi All;

Since this update\change to emailing; I have fielded a stream of asks for this feature to be back available.

I had no idea it was so widely used by my clients.

The extra steps are proving unpopular amongst my client's userbases.

Thanks

Ian


Category:

RE:

Ismail Nadir on 10/27/2022 3:05:42 PM

Much appreciated this idea!

Category:

RE:

Walter Rauch on 10/27/2022 3:01:48 PM

Long overdue

Category:

RE:

Brian Martin on 10/27/2022 2:57:53 PM

Much needed

Category:

RE:

Nicholas Smith on 10/27/2022 1:42:06 PM

This is much needed and long overdue. Many clients keep asking for it.

Category:

RE:

Kirk Anger on 10/27/2022 1:00:13 PM

This is one of those requirements for our implementation that I thought for sure would be available in base and was surprised to learn that it required customization to achieve.

Category:

RE:

Dean Porzel on 10/27/2022 11:50:29 AM

Yes, this added information would make the trade agreement more informational.

Category:

RE:

Andre Man on 10/27/2022 11:44:19 AM

Absolutely a required enhancement on planned cross docking to streamline the outbound process independent from whether the items need to be picked from storage (i.e. standard sales order picking) or coming from purchase receipts.

Category:

RE:

Krzysztof Jakubowiak on 10/27/2022 10:39:46 AM

Agree with that.


Imagine that you are exporting only one page from Voucher transactions - in D365 records are sorted from oldest to newest but when you export them to excel, they are sorted from newest to oldest... Strange...

If you are accountant, you will be happy to see both sorted the same way.

Category:

RE:

Amel Taric on 10/27/2022 8:07:14 AM

Exactly, it is calculating the last movement as transfer movement in the warehouse

Category:

  • 1 …
  • 492
  • 493
  • 494
  • 495
  • 496
  • 497
  • 498
  • 499
  • 500