Sage 100

Has anyone else run into this - import to PO_Detail the product line is missing in the list of available fields in VI. What's weird to me, is that I pulled in the PO_Detail to a MS Access db and the field IS included on that, but not in the VI files. Which just s*&ks, when you have to run an import on a Saturday to update a change in product lines....(MAS 4.50.2). Oh, and Atlas knows nothing about this.

The following file was posted by @AlnoorCassim a couple of months ago detailing how to fix a problem with VI and the IM_ItemCost file, and I was able to adapt it to fix a problem with the IM_ItemWarehouse file, so you may be able to do something similar here. As with anything like this, make backups of your backups!

Doesn't it just get set automatically based on the item you're importing in?

I interpreted @MoiraGoggin's question to be about updating existing PO records. Was that a correct interpretation?

Does it matter? If you change an item's product line, doesn't PO reflect that upon receipt of goods? It's not like you can change the product line in PO entry.

@ThereseLogeais - I just tested that and it does not - ROG uses the product line from the PO line, not the product line in inventory maintenance.

Hmm, interesting.

So if she reimported the lines, would it pull the new product line from CI_Item?

@ThereseLogeais - were you thinking export, reinitialize, and re-import?

Sounds like catch-22. RoG uses PO Line product line, but you can't re-import RoG lines because they're lines they'll just duplicate.

Gee I didn't think that many of us were working this weekend! Yes, @PhilMcIntosh this is an import to update existing PO lines. The client made a change to both the product lines and to post by warehouse in the accounts associated with it. So, existing PO lines had to have their GL account updated, which was easy enough to import. The issue now is we have the correct GL but the product line field is wrong. That wouldn't be such a big issue if the warehouse code was correct. This is a conversion and old warehouse codes weren't all defined prior to initial import, so the users are changing the warehouse codes as needed. Okay you say, well guess what, on these lines with the old product line when you change the warehouse code the GL account changes too, so now the import of the GL account is useless on these line unless I can change/correct the product line too. The kicker - SO details doesn't imbed the product line so when the product lines were reassigned at the item level, SO details displays the new product line and all that was needed was to import the updated GL account for sales and COS. It would be, and maybe has to be, that I export and re-import as @ThereseLogeais suggests. It's a pain - why PO details ODBC clearly shows the product line field but the dang VI import fields have it missing!

Is there any other way to spend a beautiful spring day than helping out fellow Minders?

You can't import product line into SO detail either. I'm guessing it is because it ties to the item's product line, something you SHOULDN'T be able to override. And it isn't a beautiful spring day here. It is gray without a single bit of color outside except for a little green in the grass. Sigh...

I agree @ThereseLogeais that product line on either SO or PO detail file should be coming from CI_Item and not hard coded...and it's gray and cloudy here too...but I'm glad that @JeffSchwenk has good weather and still is helping out the fellow Minders. Nice to know we are an all weather group...delivering in rain, sleet, snow, overcast and sunshine.

The weather is lovely here - so lovely I had to cease avoiding mowing the lawn...

Liver farther north and you can avoid the lawn for another week or so. However, it is prime time to pick up sticks and other remnants from the winter......

I'd rather be mowing anyone's lawn than dealing with product lines in PO details...

I was poking around to see if I could run the fix @PhilMcIntosh left, and look what I found under ddf_extra, oh baby...

Interesting. Some remnants of a former tweak?

Not sure where this post is at this point, but I too have always found it strange the P/L was included in PO detail - it has been this way for as long as I can remember, at least clear back to version 2.xx - also, it has never been part of SO detail, which does seem right and proper. I find it odd that Sage kept the field in PO when they adopted the 4.x framework for PO - perhaps, just lazy?

Perhaps???????? I am sure ther are many employees who want to do the right thing, but most of them are no longer employed. There are som many ""little"" issues that could be resolve VERY quickly and easily but they don't translate into new licenses...... What a pity!

@RandyMarion I do recall that ...it's been an aggravation for years that features in Sales Order never replicate to Purchase Order (how many times have we asked for PO History?)

LOL - @MoiraGoggin - don't you know that according to Sage, NO ONE has ever asked for PO History before? EVER?

I think we need to line our booth at Summit (if we have one) with blow ups of screen shots from the Sage Suggested Enhancements website, with a count down clock ticking.

I got a buddy with a booth for sale, pretty cheap!

Oh cool let's wallpaper it with Sage Enhancements you'll never see posters!