ROZETKA / socket how to make it so that the recipient's data enters the box, not the user's / rozetka_auto_action_import_orders

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: [quote] Kupriyan Vladislav Valerievich wrote: How to make sure that data from the "Recipient's data" block enters the box, not only the full name, but also the phone number? [/quote] finalization of a similar setting as "If this parameter is marked, the customer's information will be used in the process for delivery information.", only for a phone number - 1 hour [/quote] But there were no similar requests, maybe there is already a topic somewhere? It's just that it doesn't seem logical, I kind of don't understand what this checkbox gives "As this parameter is noted, the client will be taken into the process with information about the delivery." in fact, it only creates a kind of mess in the database, as it comes out with this setting from the outlet, it pulls the name of the recipient and the user's phone, well, it's generally inconvenient [file]1873[/file]

[quote] Kupriyan Vladislav Valerievich wrote: But there were no similar requests, maybe there is already a topic somewhere? [/quote] The forum is at your disposal - you can search. [quote] Kupriyan Vladislav Valerievich wrote: It just doesn't seem logical [/quote] Your "logic" is based only on your need.

We also need the correct recipient data to be pulled up. Maybe this can be implemented as part of free improvements (or rather, the development of onebox)?

[quote] Eugene wrote: Maybe this can be implemented as part of free improvements (or rather, the development of onebox)? [/quote] Earlier on the forum, a separate topic described the rules for providing investments for cloud users.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: [quote] Eugene wrote: Maybe this can be implemented as part of free improvements (or rather, the development of onebox)? [/quote] Earlier on the forum, a separate topic described the rules for providing investments for cloud users. [/quote] Thank you, if I have free time, I'll look for what you write about. In fact, it turns out that the integration with the outlet does not work fully if the recipient's contact details are not transferred to CRM (how can you use the full name of one person and the phone number of another ???? This is not logical!)

[quote] Eugene wrote: (how can you use the full name of one person and the phone number of another???? This is not logical!) [/quote] The integration works exactly as it was originally requested to be done.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: The integration works exactly as it was originally requested to be done. [/quote] Yes, it is possible that when it was made, it worked correctly. Then something changed in the outlet, something was added. Are you implementing these changes? In fact, it turns out that at the moment the integration does not work fully?

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: The integration works exactly as it was originally requested to be done. [/quote] Can you show the TOR for this task, otherwise it’s not clear why such a refinement in it is somehow a little logic the phone of one person, the full name of another?

[quote] Evgeniy Client wrote: We also need the correct recipient data to be pulled up. Maybe this can be implemented as part of free improvements (or rather, the development of onebox)? [/quote] I support

[quote] Kupriyan Vladislav Valerievich wrote: Can you show the TOR for this task, otherwise it’s not clear why such a refinement in it is somehow a little logic the phone of one person, the full name of another? [/quote] No. You must understand that you should not be reported and agreed with you on improvements that were not implemented at your request. You want change - I provided an estimate. If there is a user of paid cloud plans who also need it, we invest in it.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: [quote] Kupriyan Vladislav Valerievich wrote: Can you show the TOR for this task, otherwise it’s not clear why such a refinement in it is somehow a little logic the phone of one person, the full name of another? [/quote] No. You must understand that you should not be reported and agreed with you on improvements that were not implemented at your request. You want change - I provided an estimate. If there is a user of paid cloud plans who also need it, we invest in it. [/quote] I understand this, it’s just that this refinement is already very illogical, perhaps the client made improvements and didn’t really use it (in my practice, and in yours) it happened, so I want to look at the TK and understand whether the refinement brought benefit to the author

Hello! Please, is there any progress on this issue? Is there any plan to fix the issue described in this ticket?