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? Election season is upon a large percentage of the globe, so VOTE.
Reply with your favorites! Give Epicor something to think about over the weekend.
1 Like
KNTC-I-2615 - PO’s total value does not equal the sum of the releases’ value. This is “as designed,” but I disagree with the logic.
If you have a voided release, that amount does not get deducted from the PO total. I explain it in detail in my comment on the idea (with pictures!). It calculates tax properly (if applicable). But the PO value uses different math.
The idea is 2 years old, but I just learned about it this week (it’s not mine, but I agree).
1 Like
probably needs two totals
I liked this one from @utaylor
KIN-I-4697
Global Address verification for Kinetic.
Also these
KNTC-I-2144
Add the ability to test a Function right from Function maintenance.
ERP-I-154
We have been begging Epicor for this I think for the last 20 years it is not even a hard ask. Stop storing the TILDE SEPARATED SALES REPS and use a proper child table.
ERP-I-219
Make solution workbench “create” a solution in the target system when installed. This is another trivial one that would make everyone’s lives easier.
7 Likes
I’ll post a couple of mine that I’d really like to see:
ERP-I-1708 - Allow Resources to be Shared Between Sites
Shared resources would solve a current problem in the software - you cannot start a job at one site, perform operations and record labor, then move the job to a 2nd site for further processing using the resources/materials/labor in the 2nd site without creating a new job.
In an ideal configuration, the user would be able to develop a MOM using as many sites as the company is configured for, and once a step in the MOM calls for resources in another site, have the system automatically create a Transfer Order for the 2nd site from the 1st. When the Transfer Order is received in the 2nd site, the same job (with the same job#) from site 1 can then be picked up and processed from the 2nd site using labor, materials and resources from the 2nd site.
KIN-I-4301 - Add Activity Type Maintenance/Tracking to Kinetic SaaS
Please port Activity Type Maintenance and Activity Tracking Detail to the SaaS Cloud offering. The menu items are available in 2023.2.6, but a warning appears stating that “You must be a Global Security Manager to change this setting” if you try to save anything.
^ this one especially
1 Like
Your Top Five Epicor Ideas for the week ending 22 March 2024. The top five have a status of “Gauging Interest” and have age ranges from one year to over three years.
Improve features in User Security | Submitted 23 April 2023 | 385 Votes
Make the software more friendly for DevOps | Submitted 20 June 2020 | 277 Votes
License usage tracking | Submitted 13 July 2020 | 205 Votes
Change UOM Conversion |20 October 2020 | 197 Votes
Approval Workflow Engine for All Masters | 29 March 2021 | 187 Votes
2 Likes
Just made KIN-I-4713. Annoying that we can’t set RowMod = U with the Set Field widget.
And my major malfunction - RFQ/PO process badly needs some love: KIN-I-4648
2 Likes
I did post it in the idea too but I thought RowMod was available and it appears to be in my 2022.2 system
1 Like
I wouldn’t mind merging this with the Idea to be able to do multiple assignments within a single widget. Within BPM & Epicor Functions designer, allow the SET widget to set multiple variables/fields | 23 May 2022 | 31 Votes
3 Likes
Oh great! It isn’t available in 2021.
And to @Mark_Wonsil 's point, yes that would be great to allow multiple. Voted!
I will continue to plug this idea until the day I die!
Reduced Capability License in Data | Epicor Kinetic Ideas Portal (aha.io)
I still think Epicor is foolish that they have not seen the revenue potential.
3 Likes
A little late to the party, but this has been biting us all week:
https://epicor-manufacturing.ideas.aha.io/ideas/KIN-I-4729
From browsing around here for help initially I think @hkeric.wci may appreciate this one
I’d boost my Idea to improve the Ideas experience, but it got culled as out of scope for Ideas. I started noting down some metrics at the end of January. It got weird.
| date | total | dup | not planning | expired | delivered |
|------------+-------+-----+--------------+---------+-----------|
| 2024-01-31 | 4791 | 130 | 107 | 1234 | 242 |
| 2024-02-28 | 5035 | 134 | 109 | 1234 | 242 |
| 2024-03-06 | 5078 | 137 | 111 | 1235 | 242 |
| 2024-03-21 | 5148 | 140 | 111 | 1233 | 242 |
| 2024-03-26 | 5166 | 140 | 111 | 1234 | 244 |
I think there’s a need for work to maintain the ongoing usefulness and relevance of Ideas. Not sure how to nudge the Ideas folks on that now though.
Note that this idea was closed a long time ago and cannot be reopened… BUT you could rewrite the idea, and get the votes back in, and we can potentially get it resolved. Looking at the notes, if we resolve it, we need to do the same for Sales Orders, because it has the same issue. voided releases are not removed from the total, only voided/closed line items. Because this involves change in functionality (sales tax calculations are involved) it requires an enhancement to change… it cannot be reported as a bug.
I did look for that, but I do not see that indicated anywhere.
Here is that idea…
And here is one (totally unrelated idea) that I made that expired:
I can tell mine is expired.
Where do I see that on the first one?
We are fully aware of these, AND they have been reviewed… they are still in the mix (ie… we have not said we will not do them) but in almost every case, these are 1-2 year projects to get completed and would consume all development capacity. We have to balance getting big items done with getting smaller stories.
In the list of the top 20 vote-getters, we are delivering on 5 of them in 2024.1… and potentially (
safe harbor) another 5 are on the candidate list for 2024.2.
1 Like
Interesting… you are correct, that doesn’t show the status… it was NOT Expired, but “closed as a bug” back in 2022…
Again, it is best to have it recreated. Once it is, let me know the number, and I can move the votes over as well.
I have moved the votes. Thank you for taking the time to do that. i have launched a discussion internally. The challenge seems to be that this is fairly complicated to fix as it also involves sales tax calculation/recalculation.