See, that’s a bit concerning.
That should mean it’s loading the BASE and that should have it checked by default. 
All you @timshuwy. 
this is concerning. We need to get a case logged in with support. If you can send me the case number, we might want to escalate this, as it might be a slight flaw in how app studio handles the full screen mode in custom layers. Can you reply to this withe the case number you create?
No Tim I do not see it anywhere. There is a customization on the part screen for us
Thanks Tim,
CS0003631783 entered.
Sorry for the delay. Had to put on a different hat for a while.
1 Like
Hi all I just wanted to drop a little information on “missing” components on customized screens. Since this is the first time we are making a larger set of UI changes to the base applications we were expecting to see an uptick in issue reports and also just normal customization test & rework required scenarios. To help mitigate this we also have a PD team that is fast tracking any reports you all push to support that sound like incorrectly merged customization layers. We’re also collecting examples of things that caused you more rework than would be ideal to help improve the upgrade/merge intelligence in the future even if it’s working as we designed it, but we feel it could be improved.
The main active bug we have here is about orphaned control detection not catching all instances where a control no longer has it’s parent (the container it was placed into) in the layer. What’s above sounds like that issue, but having layers sent up to us via support to review is helpful so we can be 100% sure that is what’s happening. Not a newly introduced bug but something that’s surfaced because of the type of apps changes we are making + certain types of layer changes together.
Long story short there are a number of reasons why we may have a control which is missing it’s parent container (eg. we don’t know where to place it on the page after combining base and all layers). For example if we condensed some cards together and therefore removed a card from base, you placed custom components into that card which is no longer there. Or you did the same in your layer then we added controls to that original card which your layer says - delete this card and it’s contents. Those situations are expected, but the bug we’ve fixed is around how app studio helps you (or doesn’t) resolve that issue after upgrade.
Application studio is supposed to find and restore any component into the layout either with a best guess position or into an orphaned components zone so you can see them and place them back where you want them in your layout, but we’ve identified some bugs where this is not caught by our orphan control handling. We have a bugfix coming very soon (including as a hf for 11.2.300.3) that fixes this handling and also adds some more clear messaging, problems panel warning to show you where they are so you can review & adjust your layer. So that may be what’s going on with some of the above - fix will be dropping very shortly to help with that as well as some new help to explain what to do more clearly.
2 Likes
Thanks @bconner.
I’m still concerned about why the field would be missing on the base layer, since if you run that
only, there should be no merge to contend with.
@timshuwy … per my EpiCare case, I just submitted screen shots, etc. of this particular bug (missing the “Full Screen” button) which would then display the missing Container Field noted in the original post.
While taking screen shots, etc. for my case, I opened each of my customized Kinetic layers (I have (3) on Part Entry). Each “previewed” showing the Full Screen button and were operational in preview mode… however, if I opened the application, the Full Screen button was not there.
I went back into App Studio and Re-Saved, and Re-Published EACH customized layer… and the Full Screen button now appears when running the customized Part Entry application.
@mjfwagner … can you perform the same and see if your Full Screen button appears (after re-saving and re-publishing your active customization layers)? This would help confirm.
Thanks,
Dave
@klincecum per the chain in this thread… the Container Field isn’t missing… it is there, but (discovered by @hmwillett you have to click the “Full Screen” button to get to it (it was demoted below the “page break” if you will).
The root issue here then became that the “Full Screen” button wasn’t there for some of us to GET TO the Container (and many other) fields.
So, this was not a case of missing fields… it was a case of being able to access them in Full Screen mode.
Thank you for the additional information. I have passed this onto developers involved, and it may help them diagnose the problem and provide a quick solution.
1 Like
That’s actually what I was referring to. I should have been more clear.
Yeah so apologies i should have also addressed the fullscreen item when i explained the orphaned control fix upcoming - there were some comments aboce showing lost controls, that’s orphaning. Fullscreen is a single property of a control not being set right in the control so not an orphaned control.
Most likely the cause of that (with a layer applied) would be your layer includes that property because you’ve changed the card so its overriding the base application. Or our engine has included it for you at some point without you realizing - by design we copy more than you explicitly touch within a control into the layer which has some pros/cons for merging later, and we’ve also had some anecdotal reports of elements getting copied to the layer even without directly touching them (unreplicated currently, but something we’ve been trying to id).
The comment that the base app when run on it’s own inconsistently applies it (preview vs. runtime) implies there is some other bug to me.
Is there any plan to fix this issue in 2022.2? I reported issues with missing controls 3 months ago and nothing has been fixed yet, nor any indication of a fix coming in my tickets.
I am also experiencing this bug in 11.2.200.xx - we still have our users on Classic screens but are beginning our plans to uplift customizations into Kinetic this week. First screen I went to mess around with began experiencing this issue. And @hmwillett , sorry to report but we are on-premise hosted 
We just did our live environment migration to 11.2.200 over the weekend so it may take us a while to get support for trying 11.2.300+, in which case we may end up waiting until the later this year release of the next version of 2023 and begin an entire migration process again. A lot of good changes coming in the base layers so it may be worth it for us here to wait on them anyway.
EDIT - I’ve put in a support ticket for 11.2.200.14 / 2022.2.14, we’ll see what is given back
Did you try the above? It fixed the missing “full screen” button in my case.
Yeah, I even made it simpler yet. Took base, made a layer on it with zero changes - both preview and deployed versions are missing fields. I have a call today with someone at Epicor to take a look, they said they’ve seen it in future versions but not in my version yet.
EDIT - Confirmed that this is happening in 2022.2.14 on the JobEntry screen at the very least. Looks like 1 of the 3 missing fields is working in 2023.1.6 and they are putting in a ticket for the other two fields as an Application Studio issue. For the 1 fixed field and/or if they fix the other two fields, to get it in 2022.2 I would need to put in an Upgrade request for the version I’m on. CS0003736406
EDIT #2 - Works as intended, fields show fine in the tracker versions. However, the part that concerns me is when adding the binding to a custom text box control it still hides it. The reasoning I was given was that the system BO’s are driven by what the data is, not the other way around. Essentially if something needs to display it needs to be in a UD field and you’d have to copy it across with a BPM (my interpretation). I am going to throw an Epicor Idea in for allowing manual bound fields to still display the data because at the end of the day it’s still code and if a user wants to customize and display something, they should have that option.