You can also set a temp/display-only DATE field with the value of $DATE$, and then use this field reference in place of the $DATE$ keyword in any search qualifications that use DATE fields.
The $DATE$ keyword works fine as the value for a DATE field in a Set Fields action, it just doesn't work when used in a workflow qualification. When it is used in a qualification, it always resolves to the epoch time value used for DATE/TIME fields (# of seconds since January 1, 1970 12:00:00 GMT). --Thomas ----- Original Message ----- From: Joe DeSouza Newsgroups: gmane.comp.crm.arsystem.general To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:53 PM Subject: Re: SW00263488 - Problems with $DATE$ Keyword. ** Warren, Thomas I had this problem too towards the end of the 4th quarter of 2007 on 7.0.1 Patch 3. The issue was still open and the workaround it was to expand the $DATE$ keyword or $TIMESTAMP$ keyword to a Date or a Timestamp field and use that instead of the keyword in the workflow qualifications.. The problem with using it directly in qualifications is that it expands to a wrong value. I think it expands to the value of the keyword (look for the value of the keyword in the ar.h file) instead of the date or time value it should expand to when used directly in table field or workflow qualifications. Hope this helps... Cheers Joe D'Souza Remedy Developer / Consultant, IBM Global Technology Services, Chicago. ----- Original Message ---- From: Thomas Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:33:52 PM Subject: Re: SW00263488 - Problems with $DATE$ Keyword. Hi Warren, That defect came from an issue that I submitted to BMC Support on 3/22/2007. This was the last update I received before the issue was closed: <SNIP> ----- Original Message ----- From: "BMC Customer Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:22 AM Subject: Re: (ISS03092858, 4-Low) SupID:19340 - $ DATE$ keyword resolves incorrectly in workflow qualifications with DATE fields. > Dear Thomas, > Our records indicate that you have an open issue (ISS03092858) with a > defect (SW00263488). The purpose of this email is to notify you that we > are closing the issue that is open with Support and will leave the defect > in an open status pending action from Development. Please note that the > closing of the issue with Support has no bearing on the status of the > defect. For your convenience, you can monitor the status of your defect > by going to the support website and then follow these instructions: > - Select - View/Update under Issue Management > - Select - Defect/RFE/CAR tab > - Select - Search > Finally, please note that going forward that all issues with defects will > be c losed from the support end and the defect # will be what you will need > to use to track the status of the defect. If you have any concerns or > questions about this, please feel free to respond via email or at my > number below. > > Regards, > Jorge Batista > BMC Remedy Support Manager > 925-469-4060 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] </SNIP> The support site currently shows the defect status as "Fixed" and it lists the version as 7.0.1. However, the latest Server release notes for ARS 7.0.1 Patch 006 do not have this defect listed under the resolved defects for this or any of the previous patches for ARS 7.0.1. Maybe it was fixed in ARS 7.1.0??? I'm not holding my breath. --Thomas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Warren Baltimore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: gmane.comp.crm.arsystem.general To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:53 PM Subject: SW00263488 - Problems with $DATE$ Keyword. > Anybody have any idea of which version SW00263488 ($ DATE$ keyword > resolves > incorrectly in workflow qualifications with DATE fields.). > > It's a bug in at least 7.0.1 patch 2. I'm just trying to find it so that > I > can fix it! > > Thanks! > > > -- > Warren R. Baltimore II > Remedy Developer > UW Medicine IT Services > School of Medicine > University of Washington > Box 358220 > 1325 Fourth Ave, Suite 2000 > Seattle, WA 98101 > > Th e opinions expressed in this e-mail are in no way those of the > University > of Washington, or the State of Washington. They are my own. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
