Ideas for Acumatica

Feedback processing: We do not reply to all messages, but we do read them, analyze them, and work to improve Acumatica based on the feedback we receive. Ideas and comments may not appear immediately. Some legitimate ideas are flagged as spam and will be added when we review the spam folders.
Content: This portal is for product ideas and feedback only. If you need customer service assistance, contact your Acumatica Support Partner, submit a support case, or get assistance from community resources: LinkedIn Group or StackOverflow
No Reliance: Information is maintained on a best-efforts basis and may be changed without notice. Acumatica cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information provided or guarantee completion of features/ideas described on this portal.

Shared Lookup Filters Should be Screen Specific

Currently, you can setup a shared filter on a Lookup field in a screen which is great. The problem is that it gets shared with other screens that don't make any sense. I opened a support case and it appears that this is by design. So I'm creating this idea to see if we can change the design.

 

If I add a filter called TEST DEFAULT to the Bills and Adjustments (AP301000) screen like this:

 

It automatically appears on the Checks and Payments (AP3020000) screen which is weird:

 

I would expect my shared filter on the Bills and Adjustments (AP301000) screen to only exist on that screen.

Here is a post with others who feel the same way:

https://www.timrodman.com/augforums/acumatica-finance-modules/filters-on-ap-bills-and-adjustments-and-cheques-and-payments-are-shared-but-why

  • Tim Rodman
  • Nov 5 2018
  • Rejected
  • Attach files
  • Royce Lithgo commented
    November 21, 2018 21:49

    Vladimir, can you please reconsider? Even your example doesn't make sense - shared filters on Vendor ID and Customer ID - who out there uses the same numbering sequence on Customers and Vendors?

    This issue was already reported to Support and they said it was "by design". 

    Bills and Adjustments / Checks and Payments use a different numbering sequence configured on AP Preferences - therefore it is quite likely that any filter applier to the reference number for one wouldn't make sense applied to the other. Which is exactly our issue. Anyway, if some customer did share the sequence for these two objects, what's the harm in setting up the filter twice? I fail to see the logic in forcing the same filter on both objects. We want a default filter on Bills but we don't want that filter on Checks and the system forces it on us!

  • Vladimir Panchenko commented
    November 21, 2018 10:34

    Filters that are shared between screens are quite convenient in some cases (e.g., Customers / Vendors selector).

    In this case, it seems that there is some design issue with these screens which can be classified as a bug. Please contact our support for further assistance.

  • Royce Lithgo commented
    November 05, 2018 21:43

    Different Data Classes with different numbering sequences - where is the logic in sharing the filter? This is so annoying as the default filer we need on Bills means that whenever our users open Checks and Payments, they need to pick the original filter.