[Subcontracting] Disable "WIP Item Transfer" for Machine Center by SPinkow · Pull Request #8747 · microsoft/BCApps

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) · 2026-06-23T14:19:45Z

What & why

This pull request introduces stricter validation and improved UI logic for the "Transfer WIP Item" field on routing lines, ensuring that this field is only enabled and valid for "Work Center" type routing lines with subcontracting enabled. It also adds comprehensive automated UI and validation tests to guarantee correct behavior, and refactors some test utilities for better coverage and maintainability.

Validation and UI logic improvements:

The "Transfer WIP Item" field is now only enabled and valid for routing lines of type "Work Center" with subcontracting enabled; it is disabled and validation fails for "Machine Center" types. [1] [2] [3]
The "Transfer WIP Item" field is explicitly set as non-editable and invisible in the Subc. PO Subform page extension.

Automated test coverage:

Added multiple UI and validation tests in Subc. Subcontracting UI Test to verify that the "Transfer WIP Item" field is only enabled for eligible Work Center lines and not for Machine Center lines, and that validation fails if incorrectly set.

Test utility enhancements:

Introduced a new CreateRoutingLineForMachineCenter helper in the manufacturing management test library to streamline test setup for Machine Center routing lines, and made CreateRoutingLine public for broader utility. [1] [2]
Added necessary codeunit references and error labels to support the new test scenarios. [1] [2]

Linked work

Fixes AB#640173

How I validated this

I read the full diff and it contains only changes I intended.
I built the affected app(s) locally with no new analyzer warnings.
I ran the change in Business Central and confirmed it behaves as expected.
I added or updated tests for the new behavior, or explained below why none are needed.

What I tested and the outcome (required — be specific: scenarios, commands, screenshots for UI changes)
Added Tests and do a manual validation in client

Risk & compatibility

None

github-actions · 2026-06-23T14:20:57Z

Could not find linked issues in the pull request description. Please make sure the pull request description contains a line that contains 'Fixes #' followed by the issue number being fixed. Use that pattern for every issue you want to link.

alexei-dobriansky · 2026-07-02T09:57:29Z

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Request Changes

What this PR does

This PR blocks Transfer WIP Item on setup routing lines when the line type is Machine Center. It also disables the field on the Routing Lines and Routing Version Lines pages, hides the field on the purchase order subform, and adds UI and table validation tests.

The change is correct for the setup Routing Line table path. However, the same field also exists on Prod. Order Routing Line, and that table and page still use only Subcontracting to allow the field. Because the actual subcontracting WIP transfer flow reads the production order routing line, the invalid Machine Center setting remains reachable after a routing becomes a production order routing.

Suggestions

S1 - Production routing still allows Machine Center
Prod. Order Routing Line still validates Transfer WIP Item only against Subcontracting, and Subc. Prod. Order Rtng. still enables the page field only from Rec.Subcontracting. Add the same Type = Work Center guard there, and add a regression test for a Machine Center production order routing line. Otherwise the invalid setting is still possible in the actual subcontracting order flow.

Risk assessment and necessity

Risk: The affected area is subcontracting manufacturing setup and WIP transfer. The setup routing line change is narrow and has tests, but leaving the production order routing path open can still allow invalid WIP transfer data in the real order flow. No public API signatures or BaseApp event contracts are changed.

Necessity: The linked Bug is valid and important: Transfer WIP Item is only meaningful for subcontracting Work Center lines. The fix is necessary, but the current scope is too small because the analogous production order routing path still permits the same invalid configuration.

[AI-PR-REVIEW] version=1 system=github pr=8747 round=1 by=alexei-dobriansky at=2026-07-02T09:51:32Z lastSha=228315dd81224f2ccd282782a52ba30b44f6075c suggestions=S1

alexei-dobriansky

Please consider the suggestions

…itabilityOfWIPItemFields

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) · 2026-07-02T14:48:06Z

Please consider the suggestions

Done

github-actions · 2026-07-31T13:08:01Z

$\textbf{🟡\ Medium\ Severity\ —\ Breaking\ Changes}$

This PR hardens Transfer WIP Item from a previously accepted Machine Center scenario into a Type = Work Center runtime requirement: Routing Line and Prod. Order Routing Line now throw on Validate("Transfer WIP Item", true), and the related pages disable the field for Machine Center lines. That is an externally observable behavior break for any extension, automation, or existing workflow that set the flag on Machine Center subcontracting lines. If the combination must be retired, add an upgrade path that clears or migrates existing non-Work-Center values and preserve backward compatibility instead of introducing an immediate validation failure.

_{Agent judgement — not directly backed by a BCQuality knowledge article.}

Line mapping was unavailable, so this was posted as an issue comment.

_{👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why · AL review agent v1.26.4}

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) · 2026-07-31T13:21:39Z

🟡 Medium Severity — Breaking Changes

This PR hardens Transfer WIP Item from a previously accepted Machine Center scenario into a Type = Work Center runtime requirement: Routing Line and Prod. Order Routing Line now throw on Validate("Transfer WIP Item", true), and the related pages disable the field for Machine Center lines. That is an externally observable behavior break for any extension, automation, or existing workflow that set the flag on Machine Center subcontracting lines. If the combination must be retired, add an upgrade path that clears or migrates existing non-Work-Center values and preserve backward compatibility instead of introducing an immediate validation failure.

Agent judgement — not directly backed by a BCQuality knowledge article.

Line mapping was unavailable, so this was posted as an issue comment.

👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why · AL review agent v1.26.4

In this special case it should not be a breaking change, because an parallel PR was created for 28.x branch before the first release of the subcontracting app:
#8748
This PR was merged before creating 28.3 branch where subcontracting app has been shipped for the first time . o no new functionality is added.

github-actions · 2026-08-04T00:55:29Z

⚠️ Stale Status Check Deleted

The Pull Request Build workflow run for this PR was older than 72 hours and has been deleted.

📋 Why was it deleted?

Status checks that are too old may no longer reflect the current state of the target branch. To ensure this PR is validated against the latest code and passes up-to-date checks, a fresh build is required.

🔄 How to trigger a new status check:

📤 Push a new commit to the PR branch, or
🔁 Close and reopen the PR

This will automatically trigger a new Pull Request Build workflow run.

…itabilityOfWIPItemFields

alexei-dobriansky · 2026-08-13T11:31:03Z

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Request Changes

What this PR does

This PR disables the Transfer WIP Item control for Machine Center routing lines and adds validation so the flag can only be set on Work Center lines. That is the right direction, and the new UI and validation tests cover the direct edit path. The fix is still incomplete because production order routing lines can receive the flag from routing lines through copy/refresh logic without running the new validation.

Suggestions

S1 - Machine-center WIP flags still copy forward
Existing Routing Line records can already have Transfer WIP Item = true on Machine Center lines. OnAfterCopyFromRoutingLine still copies that value to production order routing lines without validation, so a refreshed production order can still create WIP transfer orders for a Machine Center. Clear or ignore the flag when the line type is not Work Center in the copy/refresh path.

Risk assessment and necessity

Risk: This area drives WIP transfer order creation and warehouse flow. If an old Machine Center routing line keeps the flag, the system can still create inventory movement for a scenario this PR is meant to block.

Necessity: The change is needed because Machine Centers should not use Transfer WIP Item. The scope must also cover copied or existing data, not only new page edits.

[AI-PR-REVIEW] version=1 promptVersion=2 system=github pr=8747 round=1 by=alexei-dobriansky at=2026-08-13T11:31:02Z lastSha=949ba428a884f93bc025249943171e5d252e5232 reviewKey=b4ea5e77a1f19c9f9ebcc2f06cd3a4e78b540abfc3ab1ea993d5434b2d554b54 suggestions=S1@0cc39440

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) · 2026-08-13T12:11:52Z

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Request Changes

What this PR does
This PR disables the Transfer WIP Item control for Machine Center routing lines and adds validation so the flag can only be set on Work Center lines. That is the right direction, and the new UI and validation tests cover the direct edit path. The fix is still incomplete because production order routing lines can receive the flag from routing lines through copy/refresh logic without running the new validation.

Suggestions
S1 - Machine-center WIP flags still copy forward Existing Routing Line records can already have Transfer WIP Item = true on Machine Center lines. OnAfterCopyFromRoutingLine still copies that value to production order routing lines without validation, so a refreshed production order can still create WIP transfer orders for a Machine Center. Clear or ignore the flag when the line type is not Work Center in the copy/refresh path.

Risk assessment and necessity
Risk: This area drives WIP transfer order creation and warehouse flow. If an old Machine Center routing line keeps the flag, the system can still create inventory movement for a scenario this PR is meant to block.

Necessity: The change is needed because Machine Centers should not use Transfer WIP Item. The scope must also cover copied or existing data, not only new page edits.

[AI-PR-REVIEW] version=1 promptVersion=2 system=github pr=8747 round=1 by=alexei-dobriansky at=2026-08-13T11:31:02Z lastSha=949ba428a884f93bc025249943171e5d252e5232 reviewKey=b4ea5e77a1f19c9f9ebcc2f06cd3a4e78b540abfc3ab1ea993d5434b2d554b54 suggestions=S1@0cc39440

As mentioned earlier no upgrade should be needed.

attilatoury · 2026-08-14T08:05:32Z

This PR seems to have more changes now than its 28.x counterpart #8748 so if we also want them on 28.x, let's not forget the second half of the backport

attilatoury · 2026-08-14T08:19:47Z

High — The Italian migration creates the state this PR prohibits

The legacy [RoutingLine.Table.al:396-407] has no Type validation. Therefore legacy Machine Center lines can legitimately reach migration with WIP Item = true.

The migration then:

Filters only on WIP Item = true for both record types in [ITSubcMigration.Codeunit.al:552-563].
Copies the value through direct assignment rather than Validate() in [ITSubcMigration.Codeunit.al:266-309].

That bypasses the new invariant. The resulting Machine Center flag becomes disabled in the UI, while [SubcProdOrderRtngExt.Codeunit.al:197-207]
unconditionally propagates it into production routing, where transfer creation consumes it.

Required:

Migrate the flag only when the complete new invariant is satisfied, or explicitly clear it otherwise.
Defensively prevent OnAfterCopyFromRoutingLine from copying it for non-Work-Center lines.
Add migration and copy-path tests seeded with a Machine Center legacy flag. The PR’s current tests cover only fresh Validate(..., true) calls.

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) · 2026-08-14T08:32:57Z

High — The Italian migration creates the state this PR prohibits

The legacy [RoutingLine.Table.al:396-407] has no Type validation. Therefore legacy Machine Center lines can legitimately reach migration with WIP Item = true.

The migration then:

Filters only on WIP Item = true for both record types in [ITSubcMigration.Codeunit.al:552-563].

Copies the value through direct assignment rather than Validate() in [ITSubcMigration.Codeunit.al:266-309].

That bypasses the new invariant. The resulting Machine Center flag becomes disabled in the UI, while [SubcProdOrderRtngExt.Codeunit.al:197-207] unconditionally propagates it into production routing, where transfer creation consumes it.

Required:

Migrate the flag only when the complete new invariant is satisfied, or explicitly clear it otherwise.

Defensively prevent OnAfterCopyFromRoutingLine from copying it for non-Work-Center lines.

Add migration and copy-path tests seeded with a Machine Center legacy flag. The PR’s current tests cover only fresh Validate(..., true) calls.

As mentioned earlier no upgrade should be needed becaus ethis part of code shopuld be already in BC28.x

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) added 2 commits June 23, 2026 16:11

Disable "WIP Item Transfer" for Machine Center

120b0db

Set "Transfer WIP Item" field to non-editable in Subc. PO Subform

228315d

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) requested a review from a team June 23, 2026 14:19

github-actions Bot added needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start AL: Apps (W1) Add-on apps for W1 From Fork Pull request is coming from a fork labels Jun 23, 2026

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) changed the title ~~Disable "WIP Item Transfer" for Machine Center~~ [Subcontracting] Disable "WIP Item Transfer" for Machine Center Jun 23, 2026

alexei-dobriansky enabled auto-merge (squash) June 23, 2026 14:29

github-actions Bot added Linked Issue is linked to a Azure Boards work item and removed needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start labels Jun 23, 2026

github-actions Bot added this to the Version 29.0 milestone Jun 23, 2026

Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) added the Subcontracting Subcontracting related activities label Jun 23, 2026

Predrag Maricic (PredragMaricic) approved these changes Jun 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Predrag Maricic (PredragMaricic) previously approved these changes Jun 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) previously approved these changes Jun 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Jesper Schulz-Wedde (JesperSchulz) added the SCM GitHub request for SCM area label Jun 30, 2026

alexei-dobriansky requested changes Jul 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) added 3 commits July 2, 2026 13:32

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into w/pinkow/Issue36_Ed…

d9832d8

…itabilityOfWIPItemFields

Enhance WIP item transfer validation for Machine Center routing lines

a30707d

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into w/pinkow/Issue36_Ed…

e3abec6

…itabilityOfWIPItemFields

auto-merge was automatically disabled July 2, 2026 14:46
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) dismissed stale reviews from Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) and Predrag Maricic (PredragMaricic) via e3abec6 July 2, 2026 14:46

github-actions Bot added the needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start label Jul 2, 2026

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) requested a review from alexei-dobriansky July 2, 2026 14:48

alexei-dobriansky previously approved these changes Jul 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot removed the needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start label Jul 2, 2026

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) requested review from Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) and alexei-dobriansky July 31, 2026 12:15

github-actions Bot added the needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start label Jul 31, 2026

Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) previously approved these changes Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot reviewed Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/Test/Libraries/SubcLibraryMfgManagement.Codeunit.al

github-actions Bot reviewed Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/Test/Libraries/SubcLibraryMfgManagement.Codeunit.al

github-actions Bot reviewed Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/Test/Tests/SubcSubcontractingUITest.Codeunit.al

github-actions Bot removed the needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start label Jul 31, 2026

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into w/pinkow/Issue36_Ed…

949ba42

…itabilityOfWIPItemFields

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) dismissed Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT)’s stale review via 949ba42 August 13, 2026 06:30

github-actions Bot added the needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start label Aug 13, 2026

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) closed this Aug 13, 2026

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) reopened this Aug 13, 2026

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) temporarily deployed to triage August 13, 2026 06:47 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

github-actions Bot reviewed Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/App/src/Manufacturing/SubcRoutingLine.TableExt.al

github-actions Bot reviewed Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/Test/Tests/SubcWhseCombinedScenarios.Codeunit.al

github-actions Bot reviewed Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/Test/Tests/SubcWIPTransCreateTest.Codeunit.al

github-actions Bot reviewed Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/Apps/W1/Subcontracting/App/src/Manufacturing/SubcRoutingLine.TableExt.al

github-actions Bot removed the needs-approval Workflow runs require maintainer approval to start label Aug 13, 2026

Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) approved these changes Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Chethan Thopaiah (ChethanT) enabled auto-merge August 13, 2026 20:24

Dusan Jakovljevic (JakovljevicDusan) approved these changes Aug 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) commented Jun 23, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What & why

Linked work

How I validated this

Risk & compatibility

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

alexei-dobriansky commented Jul 2, 2026

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Request Changes

Uh oh!

alexei-dobriansky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) commented Jul 2, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 31, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) commented Jul 31, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Aug 4, 2026

⚠️ Stale Status Check Deleted

📋 Why was it deleted?

🔄 How to trigger a new status check:

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

alexei-dobriansky commented Aug 13, 2026

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Request Changes

Uh oh!

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) commented Aug 13, 2026

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Request Changes

Uh oh!

attilatoury commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

attilatoury commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

Sebastian Pinkow GOB (SPinkow) commented Jun 23, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading