Kuali Rice Development
  1. Kuali Rice Development
  2. KULRICE-8544

Travel Account Maintenance (New) Document: Account Number issues

    Details

    • Type: Bug Fix Bug Fix
    • Status: Closed Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 2.2.0-rc1
    • Fix Version/s: 2.2.1
    • Component/s: Development
    • Security Level: Public (Public: Anyone can view)
    • Labels:
      None
    • Similar issues:
      KULRICE-8545Travel Account Maintenance (New) Document: Fiscal Officer Accounts Section Issue
      KULRICE-7191No validation on account numbers of Travel Maint document
      KULRICE-8038Travel Account Maintenance (New) account number validation broken and validation message nulled
      KULRICE-6855Travel Account Maintenance document routes to exception
      KULRICE-5477Rice Dev: KRAD Travel Account Maintenance (new) error
      KULRICE-11814Exception on travel account maintenance document
      KULRICE-13768Create AFT for Travel Account Bulk Update
      KULRICE-12852Direct inquiry icon is not appearing for sub account on travel account maintenance document
      KULRICE-7848Travel Account Document has a NPE on empty subsidized percent
      KULRICE-12522People Flow: Type and Type Attributes (Travel Account Number & Principal ID) not Persisted
    • Rice Module:
      KRAD
    • KRAD Feature Area:
      Document
    • Application Requirement:
      Rice
    • KAI Review Status:
      Not Required
    • KTI Review Status:
      Not Required

      Description

      On the Travel Account Maintenance Document (New)...

      1. The Travel Account number is missing its needed lookup
      2. The Account Number and Sub Account number give a must be numeric error, but the delivered account and sub account numbers are all alphanumeric (a1 for example).

      Both issues occur on all documents of the Sample Travel App, both KNS and KS L&F, where these fields exist.

        Activity

        Hide
        Jerry Neal (Inactive) added a comment -

        Hey Matt,

        Since this is creating a new account record, does it make sense to have a lookup on an existing account? The framework will throw an error if you try to edit an existing account through the new maintenance document.

        thanks,
        Jerry

        Show
        Jerry Neal (Inactive) added a comment - Hey Matt, Since this is creating a new account record, does it make sense to have a lookup on an existing account? The framework will throw an error if you try to edit an existing account through the new maintenance document. thanks, Jerry
        Hide
        Sona Sona (Inactive) added a comment -

        Hi Matt,
        The two columns ACCT_NUM and SUB_ACCT are defined as VARCHAR at the db level. Do we want to change the validation pattern to AlphaNumeric or keep the Numeric validation and change the underlying data? Thanks.

        Show
        Sona Sona (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Matt, The two columns ACCT_NUM and SUB_ACCT are defined as VARCHAR at the db level. Do we want to change the validation pattern to AlphaNumeric or keep the Numeric validation and change the underlying data? Thanks.
        Hide
        Matt Sargent added a comment -

        we should change the validation pattern. thanks!

        Show
        Matt Sargent added a comment - we should change the validation pattern. thanks!
        Hide
        Jessica Coltrin (Inactive) added a comment -

        Since these were fixed on the trunk, they are 2.3.

        Show
        Jessica Coltrin (Inactive) added a comment - Since these were fixed on the trunk, they are 2.3.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Sona Sona (Inactive)
            Reporter:
            Matt Sargent
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Structure Helper Panel