Method Community

Bill sent this in via email: Hi Adam, Adding the field is not a problem. Getting them to auto fill with the information is the questions.  Does this program have the ability to auto fill in the address and phone numbers of the client on a work order? Or does that information have to be added manually Bill Bill,  This ...

I created a new screen for all of my company's contracts, but I want to link the customer name back to the actual screen of the customer I clicked on, like how the activity list screen does. I tried to mimic that screen, but I can't link my entity field to fullName only the recordID. What am I not getting? 

I'm generating customized data for a report and am wondering how I can incorporate line breaks in my data that will work on a report. I did a quick search on DevExpress forums but just found posts on script handlers. I would hope I don't have to do that but will if I have to. Any suggestions? Thx

Chad, We are exploring different "Credit Card Tokenization" options. We are looking closly at Authorize.NET CIM solution. We plan on using some consulting time soon but I would like to veify if we are headin gin the right direction. We would lieke to follow the path of least resistance and wif Method has their customer portal already ...

The app was removed at the request of the developer.  We do have plans to integrate with Constant Contact but we don't have an ETA at this point. - Adam

Blake, I'm not aware of any rules.  It is always a best practice to publish a screen after making any changes. - Adam edit - Blake, there are errors that can occur by not publishing.  Always publish your screens when making changes.

Are you referring to the Add/Edit Work order screen?  Those fields should be available to drag and drop onto the screen. - Adam

I read the below announcement about adding an app to sync Method & Constant Contact. We have the full blown edition, but app is not listed in the library.  Has it been discontinued, and if so, is there an app that provides the same ...

No problem. Thanks for the quick response. Glad I could help with the QA.

Dang is right. But the fault on this lies completely with us. It's an obscure problem - but it was caused by a coding decision made years ago that was proven to be a poor one. You lit up our alerts, so we were already investigating before you posted. Really sorry for the panic on this one. Paul