7
Since upgrading to v10.0.37 Waves still show Shipments that are no longer on the Wave that were either:
- Removed using the Maintain shipments form or
- Removed automatically because the Work was cancelled, so it can't exist on a Wave that is already processed.
This idea is to return the original functionality.
Before the upgrade Dynamics behaved as expected:
- You remove the Shipment from the Wave and it shows as a 'Shipment not on a wave' in the Maintain shipments form.
- The Wave ID field in any Shipments forms is empty. Made it easy to identify shipments not on a Wave.
Now when you remove the Shipment:
- It shows both 'not on a wave' and still as a shipment on the Wave in the Maintain shipments form. Makes you wonder if removing the Shipment really worked.
- These Shipments still show the Wave ID in the All Shipments form. So looking for Shipments not on a Wave in that form is not possible anymore.
- When you then add the Shipment to a new Wave the Wave ID field in the All Shipments field goes blank. This is because the system has two Waves for the Shipment now and can't display a 1:n relationship on the record.
I can't add screens to this Idea, but reproducing this behavior is easy.
- Process a wave with >1 Shipment.
- Delete the Work for one of the Shipments.
View
- The 'All shipments' form and see the Wave ID still present for the shipment.
- The original Wave still shows the Shipment in the Wave lines
- Open Maintain shipments from the Wave and you will see the Shipment in the upper fast tab for 'Shipments not on a Wave' while you still see the Shipment as a Wave line on the bottom tab.
Add
- The shipment to a different Wave.
View
- The Wave ID in the 'All shipments' form is now blank.
- The shipment now shows in Wave lines for both Waves.
This was submitted as a bug but MSFT considers it by design now, so it is up to us to get it changed back.
STATUS DETAILS
Needs Votes
Administrator on 2/6/2024 9:22:06 AM
Thank you for your feedback. Currently this is not in our roadmap; however, we are tracking it and if we get more feedback and votes, we may consider it in the future.
Sincerely,
Per Lynnerup
PM, Microsoft