Bill Batch Not Working With Synonym WO Status

Darren

Go for option 2 the RFE, at least this gets it on the "review how the functionality works" list and it might be fixed in a future release. The current solution you have will suffice for now, it's the future we are worried about.


Regards,

David Thomas
Maximo Solution Architect
Operations & Supply Chain Management
IBM Global Business Services
________________________________________
Phone: 44-(0)7767 762368
E-mail: david.thomas@uk.ibm.com





IBM United Kingdom Limited
Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU



From: "HIGGITT, Darren"
To: Vincent Dickens/UK/IBM@IBMGB, David B Thomas/UK/IBM@IBMGB
Cc: "PAHUJA, Puneet" , "PEMMARAJU, Manasa"
Date: 13/11/2014 09:59
Subject: FW: PMR 27666,019,866 - Bouygues Energy & Services - S2 - SP7520 Bill Batch Not Working With Synonym WO Statu
________________________________________



Guys,

Any thoughts on the response below regarding the use of synonym statuses with bill batches?

On our other PMR for the sequence number issues, Thomas' team are working on a hot fix for both 7.5.2 and 7.5.3 as we speak.

Kind regards,
Darren

-----Original Message-----
From: Tivoli Maximo Support [mailto:mxsupeps@us.ibm.com]
Sent: 12 November 2014 17:47
To: HIGGITT, Darren
Subject: PMR 27666,019,866 - Bouygues Energy & Services - S2 - SP7520 Bill Batch Not Working With Synonym WO Statu

Hi Darren,

Regarding this PMR, Thomas and SP development have reviewed and have the following for you:

SP Development :
===
Our billing currently considers the internal value of WO status, so any client that already have created synonyms for this status are billing WOs in any of the external value for the internal intended to bill, which means that changing this behavior to bill only a selected external value will limit the billing for other statuses.
What client has done is a customization and looks valid to me if it meets their needs. There are some other valid suggestions of customization in PMR which they can do. But again, if we change this from our side we can break the way several clients are currently billing their work orders.

Having said that, I remember that the solution suggested for APAR IV55466 cited by client was to make the method PlusPBillBatch.getBillableStatusWhereClause public so clients can customize its behavior if desired.

SP Product Manager reviewing the above mentioned Dev response:
===
I am starting to wonder if there might be a better solution since this is not the first client with the same issue. Just thinking maybe the design needs thorough review. Regardless, in order to change the design and how this works we would need an enhancement not a bug fix.
===

So, in conclusion of that discussion, I have two things to suggest

1. Offer you a fix for APAR IV55466 whereby we make the class public but you would be responsible for extending or overwriting current behavior.

2. A request by Product Manager (Thomas Knowles) for you to create an RFE so he can officially start working on a possible design change (in future releases).

Do let me know how you wish to proceed.