Creating a Quote from Accounts doesn´t link anything

Hello Michael, 

When testing your scenario in a stock 10.3 instance this is the out-of-the-box behavior, the Billing Account Name is populated with the Account details.

Which version are you currently running? 

Make sure that you are looking at the default fields in the record view, maybe a new relationship or related field was added and you are looking at that instead. 

Hello Andre,

thx for the information - that makes sense why no other had this request ;-)

Well - my customer uses the Version 10.0.1 (Upgraded from an old 8). 

I try to figure out what´s wrong - there are a lot of customizations.

Compared currently the modules/Quotes/clients/base/views/record/record.php with the custom version, but no significant difference. Hope i found the part how mess up these behaviour. 

Are there changes on the record.js? Or maybe in the subpanel definitions? 

Well, i found the reason - looks like the custom/modules/Quotes/clients/base/views/create/create.js makes "nothing" or something wrong. Pretty simple logic. If i remove the create.js - it works. But with this File - the wrong behavior exists. What´s wrong with this create.js ?? (record.js looks similiar)

({ extendsFrom: 'CreateView', initialize: function (options) { this._super('initialize', [options]); this.getDefaultText(); }, getDefaultText: function () { var self = this; var beanId = this.model.get('id'); var url = App.api.buildURL("Quotes/getDefaultText/" + beanId + "/1", null, null); App.api.call('read', url, null, { success: function (response) { // do something with response } }); } })

Well, i found the reason - looks like the custom/modules/Quotes/clients/base/views/create/create.js makes "nothing" or something wrong. Pretty simple logic. If i remove the create.js - it works. But with this File - the wrong behavior exists. What´s wrong with this create.js ?? (record.js looks similiar)

({ extendsFrom: 'CreateView', initialize: function (options) { this._super('initialize', [options]); this.getDefaultText(); }, getDefaultText: function () { var self = this; var beanId = this.model.get('id'); var url = App.api.buildURL("Quotes/getDefaultText/" + beanId + "/1", null, null); App.api.call('read', url, null, { success: function (response) { // do something with response } }); } })

EVentually your custom js controller should extendsFrom 'QuotesCreateView' instead.

Michael,

Andre is correct that the file should be extending from 'QuotesCreateView' but your main issue is that this custom create.js file is actually doing nothing at all. It is simply calling the parent version of initialize() then making a call to an API endpoint that it does nothing with. Your "success(response)" function only has a comment line in it so it is doing nothing with the API response.

I'd guess your best bet is just to remove this custom create.js until you find out what the developer was trying to do with it. It is not performing any function that I can see (unless it is just trying to ensure that the API call gets made but is not worried about what it returns!) and is incorrectly extending anyway.

This is probably why the correct default behaviour works for you when you don't have this file.

Thanks,

JH.

The missing success callback is not responsible for such a behavior, probably it is under development.

Whenever you create a custom js controller you need to figure out if a default one already exists so you may decide which to extendsFrom.

Guys you are awesome. That´s the solution. After i change the "extendsFrom" everything still work.

And yes, i striped the code a little bit. the "getDefaultText" Function has some logic inside, but i was aware, that that was not the reason.

Solution was so simple - but now i am aware for that in the future.

Thanks a lot!

Andre,

You are quite right, I wasn't as clear as I could have been. My intention was to suggest that if the function was empty then removing the file might be the best solution to avoid unnecessary API calls. As Michael has pointed out, it wasn't actually empty so was needed.

In any case, the "extendsFrom" was going to be the cause of the issue as I tried to agree with in my first line.

Apologies for any confusion in my reply

@Michael - glad you have the issue sorted now.

Thanks,

JH.