Hi ​@Chamath Kuruppuarachchi,

The current capability check logic is not built to support projects. The supply/demands from the interim orders ends up on project * anyway, and netting is done from standard inventory instead of project inventory. Also, when releasing the CO reservations from standard inventory are transferred to DOP even though the DOP order is project connected and should not be able to handle standard inventory reservations.

Since a proper fix couldn't be implemented in time for 22R1, the function has been disabled to prevent incorrect behavior.

Thanks,
Sarasi

Hi ​@sdhalk ,

Thanks for the explanation. But my scenario is not include any DOPs.

Its quite simple. I have a customer order line and from the line level I am checking the capability check to set the proper ship date and as expected CO line dates are getting recalculated.

To track the costs and everything I am connecting a project to the CO line. Once I do that all the dates calculated through capability check is getting reverted back to the original date. Is there a reason for this. 

Why connecting a project to a CO line revert all the date changes made via the capability check. Kind of feels this is a bug in the application.

Let me know your thoughts please.

Regards,

Chamath

Hi ​@Chamath Kuruppuarachchi,

In the 22R1 release, the possibility to run capability check for a project connected customer order line was temporarily removed. However, from 23R2 and onwards, it is once again possible to run capability check for a project connected customer order line. In these later releases, the capability check considers either standard inventory or project inventory during the netting process, depending on the project connection. 

If you have run capability check for a customer order line and then do changes on the customer order line that makes the result from the capability check invalid, the dates on the customer order line are reset and the interim structure that was saved as a result of running the capability check is canceled. This can happen, for example, if you change the dates or the sales quantity on the customer order line. In older releases, it seems like this also happened if you connected the line to a project activity. However, in later releases, it is no longer possible to connect a customer order line that has been capability checked to a project activity. You first need to cancel the connected interim order structure, which would also reset the dates. 

Best regards,
Ellen

Hi ​@ellfse ,

Thank you for your response, I agree with if there is a date change or a value change should lead to a reset.

Basically that means project inventory is not supported for capability check right?

Just wondering why IFS is giving a message saying that “you can choose to run the capability check again.” Which obviously you cannot it seems. 

Customers mainly use project inventory to track the cost and manage the project aspects of it. But resetting the dates when the project is connected seems not logical. 

Thanks,

Chamath

Hi ​@Chamath Kuruppuarachchi 

To run capability check for a project connected customer order line is supported from the 23R1 release and onwards (I accidently wrote 23R2 in previous comment, that was incorrect). However, please keep in mind that in order to run capability check, the supply code must be set to Shop Order, DOP Order, Invent Order, Int Purch Trans or Int Purch Dir.

This means it is not supported to run capability check for a line with supply code set to Project Inventory. Are you aware of any customers requesting this functionality?

If you are using 22R1 or 22R2, running capability check for a project connected line is not supported at all.

I agree the message saying that “you can choose to run the capability check again” can be generated in situations where it becomes misleading, when you are actually unable to run the capability check again unless you first do some modifications, such as removing the project connection in 22R1 or 22R2. I will work on sorting this out for future releases. Thank you for sharing your concerns.
 

Best regards,

Ellen