[master] Bin Capacity Policy "Prohibit More Than Max. Cap." fails and allows more than the maximum Capacity, when you split lines on Inventory Movement

[neeleshsinghal]

Workitem: Bug 641780: [master] [ALL-E] Bin Capacity Policy "Prohibit More Than Max. Cap." fails and allows more than the maximum Capacity, when you split lines on Inventory Movement

Fixes AB#641780

Issue: In non-directed (basic) warehouses with Bin Capacity Policy "Prohibit More Than Max. Cap.", registering partial Inventory Movements does not enforce the destination bin's Maximum Cubage/Weight, allowing the bin to be overfilled.

Cause: RegisterWhseJnlLine in WhseActivityRegister Codeunit only computed Cubage/Weight for directed locations, so basic-warehouse movement entries were written with zero cubage, hiding previously moved quantities from the capacity check.

Solution: Calculate Cubage/Weight via WMSMgt.CalcCubageAndWeight (base UoM) in the non-directed branch so movement Warehouse Entries carry cubage and the "Prohibit More Than Max. Cap." check correctly blocks over-capacity registrations.

[github-actions]

Copilot PR Review

Iteration 2 · Outcome: completed

Knowledge source: https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality@822cae1b2771ac25f665f73369f69093bd4fd630

Findings by domain

Findings split into Knowledge-backed (cite a BCQuality article) and Agent (the agent's own judgement, no matching BCQuality rule).

Domain	Findings	Knowledge-backed	Agent	Inline	Fallback
Style	1	1	0	1	0

Totals: 1 knowledge-backed · 0 agent findings.

Orchestrator pre-filter (13 file(s) excluded)

• layer-disabled (knowledge) : 13 file(s)

_{Findings produced by the Copilot CLI agent against BCQuality at 822cae1b2771ac25f665f73369f69093bd4fd630. Reply 👎 on any inline comment to flag false positives.}

[alexei-dobriansky]

Agentic PR Review - Round 1

Recommendation: Accept with Suggestions

What this PR does

This PR makes non-directed warehouse activity registration calculate Cubage and Weight on the warehouse journal line before WhseJnlRegisterLine.Run. That means movement warehouse entries now store the moved cubage, so the next partial registration sees the cubage already posted in the destination bin.

The fix matches the root cause in the work item. Bin.CalcPostedCubageAndWeight can now include the first partial movement, and the second movement is blocked when it would exceed Maximum Cubage. The added test verifies that the first movement writes cubage to Warehouse Entry and that the next movement is rejected.

Suggestions

S1 - Split Line path is not exercised
Please add or adjust the regression test so it uses WarehouseActivityLine.SplitLine or the Inventory Movement page action before registering partial quantities. The current test proves the posted cubage root cause, but it does not exercise the Split Line path from the bug report.

Risk assessment and necessity

Risk: Warehouse bin-capacity validation is sensitive because an incorrect fix can allow overfilled bins or block valid movements. The code change is narrow, uses existing WMSMgt.CalcCubageAndWeight, and does not change public APIs or event signatures.

Necessity: The linked bug is clear and valid. Without this fix, users can bypass Prohibit More Than Max. Cap. by registering partial inventory movements, so the change is needed.

---

[AI-PR-REVIEW] version=1 system=github pr=9264 round=1 by=alexei-dobriansky sha=f071949b76bb5e22cfdd791acccbf0769130849e

[github-actions]

$\textbf{🟡\ Medium\ Severity\ —\ Style} \quad \color{gray}{\texttt{\small Iteration\ 2}}$

The var block in the new test procedure InvtMovementProhibitsExceedingBinMaxCubageOnSplitLineMovements interleaves primitive Decimal variables (CubagePerUnit, FirstQty, MaxCubage, SecondQty) with Record variables (FromBin, Item, Location, ToBin, WarehouseActivityHeader, etc.) in alphabetical order across types.

CodeCop AA0021 requires all Record (and other complex-type) declarations to precede primitive types such as Decimal within the same var block.

Suggested fix (apply manually — could not be anchored as a one-click suggestion):

        FromBin: Record Bin;
        Item: Record Item;
        Location: Record Location;
        ToBin: Record Bin;
        WarehouseActivityHeader: Record "Warehouse Activity Header";
        WarehouseActivityLine: Record "Warehouse Activity Line";
        WarehouseEmployee: Record "Warehouse Employee";
        WarehouseEntry: Record "Warehouse Entry";
        CubagePerUnit: Decimal;
        FirstQty: Decimal;
        MaxCubage: Decimal;
        SecondQty: Decimal;

Knowledge:

• microsoft/knowledge/style/variable-declaration-order-by-type.md

_{👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why}

[alexei-dobriansky]

Agentic PR Review - Round 2

Recommendation: Accept

What this PR does

The new commit updates the regression test so it creates one Inventory Movement, splits both Take and Place lines with WarehouseActivityLine.SplitLine, registers only the first split part, then tries to register the remaining split part. This now covers the split-line path from the ADO repro, while still proving that the first registration writes Cubage to Warehouse Entry and the second registration is blocked by bin capacity.

The production fix is unchanged since round 1. It still fills Cubage and Weight for non-directed movement warehouse journal lines before WhseJnlRegisterLine.Run, which is the right point because the registered Warehouse Entries need those values for the next capacity calculation.

Status of previous suggestions

ID	Title	Status	Author response
S1	Split Line path is not exercised	Addressed	Added a split-line regression test in 12040a828e.

New observations (commits since round 1)

None - changes only addressed the previous suggestion.

Risk assessment and necessity

Risk: Warehouse bin-capacity validation is sensitive because a wrong cubage or weight value can allow overfilled bins or block valid movements. The round-2 change is test-only and uses the existing SplitLine flow. The production change remains narrow and does not change public APIs or event signatures.

Necessity: The linked Bug 641780 is clear and valid. Without this fix, users can bypass Prohibit More Than Max. Cap. by registering split Inventory Movement quantities, so the change is needed.

---

[AI-PR-REVIEW] version=1 system=github pr=9264 round=2 by=alexei-dobriansky sha=12040a828e30253b54f0b92846b2f8fda4d5c806