[Extensibility Request] issue 30352: add SkipNewExpirationDateCheck to OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot

[AleksandricMarko]

Summary

The reporter needs a way to bypass the mandatory New Expiration Date validation performed during item journal posting in codeunit 22 "Item Jnl.-Post Line". The existing OnBeforeCheckExpirationDate (IsHandled) event would force them to replicate the whole procedure and skip several downstream events, risking conflicts with other extensions. This PR extends the existing OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot integration event with a new var SkipNewExpirationDateCheck: Boolean parameter so a subscriber can skip only that single TestField check without affecting any other logic.

Source issue repository: microsoft/ALAppExtensions; issue number: 30352

Changes Made

• OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot - appended a new var SkipNewExpirationDateCheck: Boolean parameter to the integration event; CheckExpirationDate now initializes it to false, passes it to the event, and only performs TempTrackingSpecification.TestField("New Expiration Date", ...) when the subscriber has not set it to true. Adding a parameter to an existing integration event is non-breaking for current subscribers. The same change was mirrored across the W1 base layer and its country-layer counterparts (ES, APAC, CH, RU, IT).

Fixes AB#642607

[github-actions]

$\textbf{🟠\ High\ Severity\ —\ Events}$

The pre-existing local IntegrationEvent "OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot" is retrofitted with a new "var SkipNewExpirationDateCheck: Boolean" parameter that, when a subscriber sets it true, causes the following TestField("New Expiration Date", ExistingExpirationDate) validation to be skipped entirely. This is the IsHandled bypass pattern applied to an existing shipped event rather than a new dedicated one: existing subscribers never agreed to make this check skippable, and the guarded TestField enforces expiration-date/lot-quantity consistency (a data-integrity validation), not a pure calculation. Per BCQuality guidance, critical validations like this should keep running unconditionally while only the SumLot calculation is exposed as overridable, or a new dedicated OnBefore event should be introduced instead of widening this event's contract.

Knowledge:

• microsoft/knowledge/events/do-not-bypass-critical-operations-with-ishandled.md
• microsoft/knowledge/events/do-not-add-ishandled-to-an-existing-event.md

_{👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why · AL review agent v1.13.4}

[qasimikram]

S1: Please add regression coverage proving that the default path still raises the existing expiration-date validation and that setting SkipNewExpirationDateCheck := true skips only this TestField without bypassing the rest of CheckExpirationDate.

[qasimikram]

The implementation is consistent across the W1 and localized code copies and scopes the bypass to the requested expiration-date validation.

S1: Please add regression coverage for the new subscriber-controlled path. The test should prove that the default path still raises the existing validation error and that setting SkipNewExpirationDateCheck := true skips only this TestField without bypassing the remainder of CheckExpirationDate.