+- webERP Forum (http://www.weberp.org/forum)
+-- Forum: webERP Discussion (http://www.weberp.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Problems / Bugs? (http://www.weberp.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: [Solved] CustWhereAlloc.php (/showthread.php?tid=949)
[Solved] CustWhereAlloc.php - MacPhotoBiker - 06-25-2013
Hi,
when I inquire "Receivables -> Where allocated inquiry -> Sales invoice -> 2", I get correctly "Receipt 1".
But when I inquire the other way round "Receipt 1", I get
"INFORMATION Message : There are no allocations made against this transaction"
Shouldn't it give me "Sales invoice 2"? (And actually even more, since the same receipt paid several customer invoices.)
Also, when inquiring, the menu bars left and top disappear, so there's no way to navigate back other than the "back" button, which in Chrome gives me a "resubmission confirm message" (browser generated, but still a bit annoying).
Thanks for any help on that!
RE: CustWhereAlloc.php - phil - 06-25-2013
Hi,
Sounds like a bug ... will have to look into this one.
RE: CustWhereAlloc.php - MacPhotoBiker - 06-25-2013
Thanks Phil. Please let me know if you need something from my end.
RE: CustWhereAlloc.php - phil - 06-25-2013
Ah no ... I see what you are doing...
In the "Customer How Paid Inquiry"??
You can select only invoices or negative receipts (i.e. payments) to see which payments or credits were allocated against the invoice or payment. If the receipt was a real receipt (i.e. not a payment) then there cannot possibly be any receipts or credit notes allocated to it - hence the result.
I should add some more useful message here to make this clear. If you want to look at how a receipt was allocated you can go into that receipt at any time through either the customer inquiry screen and change these allocations at will.
RE: CustWhereAlloc.php - MacPhotoBiker - 06-25-2013
Hi Phil, thanks a lot for clarifying! I just assumed it's a two way search (and the terms "invoice" vs. "receipt" somehow seemed to confirm that
)Anyway, no big deal, thanks again for clarifying.