+1.

Best Regards,
--
*Rishi Solanki* | Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part 2, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore,
M.P 452010
Linkedin: *Rishi Solanki*
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rishi-solanki-62271b7/>
Direct: +91-9893287847


On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 1:19 PM Pawan Verma <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Yes, We should add a workflow to add associated parties of return in
> ReturnContactMech entity.
>
> --
> Kind Regards,
> *Pawan Verma* | Technical Consultant
> HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part 2, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> Indore,
> M.P. 452010
> Linkedin: *Pawan Verma <https://www.linkedin.com/in/pawan--verma>*
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:55 PM Suraj Khurana <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > +1.
> > This could be a nice improvement to have.
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Suraj Khurana
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:33 PM Vaibhav Jain <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > *Bottom line:*
> > > ReturnContactMech entity is not used in OFBiz
> > >
> > > *Story:*
> > > ContactMech of parties involved in an order is captured in
> > OrderContactMech
> > > entity.
> > > ContactMech of parties involved in the return is not captured in
> > > ReturnContactMech entity.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > *Vaibhav Jain* | Senior Enterprise Software Engineer
> > > HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
> > > Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part 2, Near Brilliant Convention Center,
> > > Indore,
> > > M.P 452010
> > > Linkedin: *Vaibhav Jain* <
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/vaibhav-jain-170793/
> > > >
> > >
> > > [image: Mailtrack]
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&;
> > > >
> > > Sender
> > > notified by
> > > Mailtrack
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&;
> > > >
> > > 04/27/19,
> > > 12:23:48 PM
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to