Add 28.X datasets

dataset/problemstatement/microsoft__BCApps-7831/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+# Title: [Subcontracting] Standard Task not propagated from Routing to Prod. Order Routing or Subcontracting Worksheet; prices not picked up
+## Repro Steps:
+![Image](https://dynamicssmb2.visualstudio.com/1fcb79e7-ab07-432a-a3c6-6cf5a88ba4a5/_apis/wit/attachments/10f744c3-9170-4590-8dd3-cf148b602b4a?fileName=image.png)
+
+## Hints:
+### Repro Steps
+**Summary**: The Subcontracting app needs to be aligned with changes made to the "Description 2" field on various tables. The bug description contains inline screenshots showing the field changes but minimal textual detail.
+
+#### Steps to Reproduce
+1. Open Business Central with the Subcontracting module enabled.
+2. Identify all tables in the Subcontracting app that reference or use the "Description 2" field (e.g., Item, Production Order Line, Purchase Line, or other related tables).
+3. Check that the Subcontracting app properly reads, writes, and displays the "Description 2" field wherever it is used in the base BC application.
+4. If "Description 2" has been modified (renamed, repositioned, or had its properties changed) in the base tables, verify that:
+   - All Subcontracting page extensions show the updated "Description 2" correctly.
+   - All Subcontracting codeunits that reference "Description 2" are aligned with the new field definition.
+   - All API queries or pages that expose "Description 2" reflect the changes.
+5. Look for compilation errors or runtime issues caused by the misalignment.
+
+#### Expected Result
+- The Subcontracting app should be fully aligned with any changes to the "Description 2" field in the base BC application.
+- No compilation errors or data integrity issues related to this field.
+-
+#### Actual Result
+- The Subcontracting app references are not aligned with the "Description 2" field changes, as shown in the inline screenshots.
+-
+#### Additional Context
+- Related to
+620425 [Subcontracting] "Single Instance Dictionary" is a very generic name. Rename & refactor it appropriately (SingleInstanceDictionary naming/refactoring).
+
+#### Self-Review
+- The repro steps cover the general alignment concern but specific tables/pages affected are documented in the screenshots only.
+- This is a code alignment/compatibility issue following upstream changes.
+
+**Score: 5/10** - The bug description is primarily screenshots with limited textual context. Steps provide a reasonable framework for verification.
+
+[AI-REPRO] score=5 | workItemId=620556 | generated=2026-03-25 | sources=Title,Description (inline images)

dataset/problemstatement/microsoft__BCApps-8059/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# Title: [master][All-e]Peppol E-Invoice  cannot be validated when price incl VAT is used in a document
+## Repro Steps:
+1.  Go to Company Information and add a SWIFT Code (you need to created a new one, but it can be any number)
+2.  Go to E-Document Services and open the E-DOCUMENTS
+    Document Format should be PEPPOL BIS 3.0
+3.  In the E-Document Service use buton "Configure documents to export" and add the sales invoice
+4.  Go to Electronic Document Formats and make sure you have the setup for PEPPOL BIS3 / Sales Invoice / Codeunit 1610
+5.  Go to Workflows and make sure you have the default workflow for "Send E-Documents to one Service" enabled
+6.  Go to Document Sending Profiles, check E-DOCUMENTS and make sure this uses
+    Electronic Document = E-Document Workflow
+    E-Document Workflow = MS-EDOCSTOS-01 (the one from step 5)
+7.  Open Customer Card 10000 and change the following:
+    Document Sending Profile = E-DOCUMENTS
+    VAT Registration No = GB123456789
+8.  Create a new Sales Invoice for customer 10000
+    Posting / Document Date = (use the suggested ones)
+    Your Reference = TEST
+    Price Incl VAT = YES
+9.  Now add a new line to the sales invoice:
+    1x item 1896-S
+10.  Post the Sales invoice with option Post and Send
+11.  Go to E-Documents 
+    The newest entry should be the one that we just created by posting the sales invoice with post and send
+    Highlight that entry, then go to Actions -> E-Document Logs
+12.  From the E-Document Logs you can download the e-invoice with button Export File, an XML file is now exported
+13.  Open a Peppol Validator (e.g. [Free Online Peppol Validator. Validate UBL & XML Invoices Instantly](https://peppolvalidator.com/)), upload and validate the e-invoice downloaded in step 12
+
+**Expected Outcome:**
+The file should validate without error messages
+
+**Actual Outcome:**
+The file cannot be validated without error messages:
+![Image](./error_message.png)
+
+**Troubleshooting Actions Taken:**
+When you post a sales invoice that does not have option Price incl VAT enabled, the created e-document can be validated without error message.
+
+## Description:

dataset/problemstatement/microsoft__BCApps-8253/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+# Title: [Subcontracting] Standard Task not propagated from Routing to Prod. Order Routing or Subcontracting Worksheet; prices not picked up
+## Repro Steps:
+**Issues:**
+
+1.  **Standard Task not propagated from Routing:** When a routing line has a Standard Task set, that value is not copied to the corresponding Prod. Order Routing line.
+2.  **Standard Task not propagated to Subcontracting Worksheet:** The Standard Task from the routing line is also not populated in the Subcontracting Worksheet when lines are pulled.
+3.  **Standard Task not editable in Subcontracting Worksheet:** Even if the field were present, it is not editable in the Subcontracting Worksheet, preventing manual correction.
+4.  **Prices not picked up:** If the user has configured prices tied to a Standard Task, those prices are not used because the Standard Task is missing from the subcontracting flow.
+
+**Expected:** Standard Task should be propagated from Routing to Prod. Order Routing and to the Subcontracting Worksheet. The field should be editable in the worksheet. Prices bound to Standard Task should be applied correctly.
+
+## Description:
+
+
+## Hints
+
+### Repro Steps Clarity Score: 6/10
++Specificity +Determinism
+-Missing environment -Unverified UI references
+-Missing data values (no concrete Standard Task / item / routing combo named in the bug)
+
+The bug enumerates 4 related symptoms but provides no concrete data combination. Steps below pick concrete demo values and a sequenced repro for each symptom.
+----
+### Detailed Repro Steps
+#### Environment
+- Build: Master — Subcontracting feature dev build (target branch master).
+- Localization: W1 (any localization should reproduce).
+- Functional area: SCM / Manufacturing — Subcontracting (Standard Task propagation, Subcontracting Worksheet editing, Subcontracting price lookup).
+
+#### Prerequisites
+- Subcontracting feature available with: a Subcontractor vendor, a Subcontracting Work Center, an item with a Production BOM and a Routing.
+- A Standard Task code defined (e.g., STD-PAINT) — choose Search > Standard Tasks > + New to add one.
+- A Routing that includes the Subcontracting Work Center, with at least one Routing Line whose Standard Task Code is set to STD-PAINT.
+- A Subcontracting price (e.g., on the Standard Task card or on the Subcontracting Work Center / Subcontractor Vendor) that is specifically tied to Standard Task STD-PAINT (so that when STD-PAINT is present on the line, the price applies; when absent, it does not).
+- A Released Production Order created from the manufacturing item with the routing above.
+
+#### Steps — Issue 1: Routing → Prod. Order Routing propagation
+1. Choose Search > Routings, open the routing used by the manufacturing item, and confirm the Subcontracting routing line has Standard Task Code = STD-PAINT.
+2. Choose Search > Released Production Orders, open the order created in prerequisites.
+3. Drill into Lines > Routing to open Prod. Order Routing.
+4. Observe Issue 1: the Prod. Order Routing line corresponding to the Subcontracting operation has Standard Task Code = blank (it was not copied from the source Routing).
+
+#### Steps — Issue 2: Routing → Subcontracting Worksheet propagation
+5. Choose Search > Subcontracting Worksheet, choose the related link.
+6. Choose Calculate Subcontracts…, accept defaults, run.
+7. Observe Issue 2: the worksheet line for the production order's subcontracting operation has Standard Task Code = blank, even though the routing line has STD-PAINT set.
+
+#### Steps — Issue 3: Standard Task not editable in Subcontracting Worksheet
+8. On the worksheet line from step 7, attempt to set Standard Task Code = STD-PAINT either by typing or via the lookup.
+9. Observe Issue 3: the field is read-only / not editable, so the missing value cannot be corrected manually before Carry Out Action Message.
+
+#### Steps — Issue 4: Prices not picked up because Standard Task is missing
+Without correcting the Standard Task (since you cannot, per Issue 3), choose Carry Out Action Message… to create the Subcontracting Purchase Order.
+Open the resulting Subcontracting Purchase Order line.
+Observe Issue 4: the Direct Unit Cost / line price is the work-center default price, not the price tied to Standard Task STD-PAINT. Because the Standard Task is missing from both the routing line and the worksheet, the price-lookup step never matches the standard-task-specific price and the wrong (or default) price is applied.
+
+#### Expected Result
+- Routing → Prod. Order Routing → Subcontracting Worksheet → Subcontracting Purchase Order all preserve Standard Task Code end-to-end.
+- The Standard Task Code field is editable in the Subcontracting Worksheet so users can correct or override.
+- Subcontracting price lookup uses the Standard Task Code as a key, so prices defined per Standard Task are applied to the resulting PO line.
+
+#### Actual Result
+- Standard Task Code is dropped at the Routing → Prod. Order Routing step, and remains missing on the Subcontracting Worksheet and the resulting Subcontracting PO. Prices tied to Standard Task are therefore never selected.
+
+#### Notes
+- Severity 3, Priority 2. Issue type: Code Defect. Found by Manual Testing: Other Test Pass on 2026-04-30 by Chethan Thopaiah.
+- Likely fix surfaces:
+    - Refresh production order routine (Codeunit "Prod. Order Routing Mgt." or equivalent) — copy Standard Task Code from Routing Line to Prod. Order Routing Line.
+    - Calculate Subcontracts (Codeunit "Subcontracting Worksheet Mgt." / similar) — copy Standard Task Code from Prod. Order Routing Line into the worksheet line.
+    - Page extension on Subcontracting Worksheet — set the Standard Task Code field Editable = true (subject to UX review).
+    - Subcontracting price lookup — extend the price-source lookup to include Standard Task Code as a key so prices tied to a Standard Task are matched.
+- Sibling Subcontracting bugs that touch the routing → worksheet → PO chain: #633223, #633224, #633227, #633228, #633229.
+
+[AI-REPRO] score=6 | workItemId=633226 | generated=2026-04-30 | sources=repro_steps,documentation

dataset/problemstatement/microsoft__BCApps-8286/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+# (Bug 636078): [Subcontracting] Worksheet pricing passes total base qty instead of qty-per-UoM to ConvertPriceToUOM — wrong Direct Unit Cost
+
+## Summary
+
+Fixes the Subcontracting Worksheet **Direct Unit Cost** when the production order UoM differs from the subcontractor price-list UoM.
+
+`Subc. Price Management.GetSubcPriceForReqLine` passed `RequisitionLine.GetQuantityBase()` (total base quantity of the order) as the per-UoM conversion factor to `ConvertPriceToUOM`. Because `ConvertPriceToUOM` computes `DirectCost := PriceListCost / PriceListQtyPerUOM * ProdQtyPerUoM`, the result was multiplied by the order quantity instead of the UoM conversion factor. The Carry-Out Action Message-created Purchase Order then inherited the inflated cost.
+
+Comparison of the three call sites (only the worksheet path was wrong):
+
+| Path | 2nd param | Correct? |
+|------|-----------|----------|
+| Routing (`SetRoutingPriceListCost`) | `ProdQtyPerUom` | Yes |
+| **Worksheet (`GetSubcPriceForReqLine`)** | **`RequisitionLine.GetQuantityBase()`** | **No (fixed here)** |
+| Purchase Order (`GetSubcPriceForPurchLine`) | `PurchaseLine.GetQuantityPerUOM()` | Yes |
+
+### Fix
+
+Pass `RequisitionLine.GetQuantityForUOM()` instead, matching the routing and purchase paths.
+
+### Test
+
+Added `WorksheetDirectUnitCostUsesQtyPerUoMNotBaseQtyForUoMConversion` in `SubcSubcontractingTest`:
+
+- Item with PCS base UoM + SET alternative UoM (10 PCS per SET), vendor and work center with that vendor as subcontractor, subcontractor price of 1000 / PCS.
+- Stages a Requisition Line for 3 SET (= 30 PCS base) and asserts `Direct Unit Cost = 10000` (price * Qty-per-UoM), not 30000 (pre-fix behavior).
+- Also asserts the same-UoM (PCS) path still returns 1000 - guards against regression.
+
+### Work Item
+
+[AB#636078](https://dynamicssmb2.visualstudio.com/1fcb79e7-ab07-432a-a3c6-6cf5a88ba4a5/_workitems/edit/636078)

dataset/problemstatement/microsoft__BCApps-8287/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# [Quality Management] Add missing validation of "Allowable Values" in Quality Test card
+
+## What & why
+
+<img width="806" height="231" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/387f9660-f087-484f-9af9-b9edc74a9045" />
+
+
+## Linked work
+
+Fixes [AB#624240](https://dynamicssmb2.visualstudio.com/1fcb79e7-ab07-432a-a3c6-6cf5a88ba4a5/_workitems/edit/624240)
+
+
+
+
+

dataset/problemstatement/microsoft__BCApps-8293/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+# Bug 634953: Fix factbox drilldowns for finished production orders
+
+## Summary
+- **Bug**: Subcontracting factbox drilldowns in Purchase Order and Transfer Order break after the linked production order is finished.
+- **Root cause**: \Subc. ProdO. Factbox Mgmt.\ (CU 99001559) hardcodes \SetRange(Status, ::Released)\ in all 5 procedures, so no data is returned once status moves to Finished.
+- **Fix**: Replace \SetRange(Status, ::Released)\ with \SetFilter(Status, '>=%1', ::Released)\ across all filter procedures so that both Released and Finished production orders are found. \ShowProductionOrder\ now opens the correct page (\Released Production Order\ or \Finished Production Order\) based on the resolved status.
+
+## Changes
+- \SubcProdOFactboxMgmt.Codeunit.al\ — Fixed all 5 affected procedures
+- \SubcSubcontractingTest.Codeunit.al\ — Added \ProdOFactboxMgmtShowsDataAfterProdOrderFinished\ test ([SCENARIO 634953])
+
+## Test
+Added \ProdOFactboxMgmtShowsDataAfterProdOrderFinished\ in codeunit 139989 — verifies that \CalcNoOfProductionOrderRoutings\ and \CalcNoOfProductionOrderComponents\ return positive counts after the production order is finished.
+
+Fixes [AB#634953](https://dynamicssmb2.visualstudio.com/1fcb79e7-ab07-432a-a3c6-6cf5a88ba4a5/_workitems/edit/634953)
+
+:robot: Generated with GitHub Copilot
+
+
+