Well, as long as the workflow goes both ways, I suppose that would work. Good idea!
Rick On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Moore, Christopher Allen < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** > > Rick- > > > > A variation of your last suggestion is the one I was originally leaning > more towards. I knew I couldn't just delete the status because the other > options would just get moved up the list and get new numbers (unless I > changed the numbering to custom), but I don't like the idea of doing that. > What I was thinking should work would be to hide the status field and make > a new one in it's place that only has the options we want in it. I can then > set that value into the real status field on save or modify with a low > execution number. That way I wouldn't have to change any of the other > workflow, except possibly the "wizard" stuff. > > > Any reason why that wouldn't work? > > > Chris > > > > > > *Chris Moore* | Remedy Developer | GOIS > > Unisys | 9500 Metric Blvd | Austin TX 78758 | 512 719-9682 > > > THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY > MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received > this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its > attachments from all computers. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Rick Cook > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 12, 2008 1:53 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Removing Pending status as a choice > > > > ** Well, the obvious reason is that it numerically re-orders the values > below it in the field. If you don't know about that, you should before > deleting the value. There's likely to be workflow that will perform > unpredictably if you were to delete the value. > > > You could, however, change the text of the Pending value to say something > like "Don't Select" or something, without affecting any workflow. > > There is another, more drastic step you might consider, though I think > it's overkill for your situation. Make the Status field read-only, and > change the values via workflow, only when certain criteria are met. That > way, users can never select any value. > > Another long term change, though one that would have to be accounted for > in any upgrade, is to change the nature of the field (by using a different > field) so that the field values didn't use the ID Enumeration value of > Linear (a 7.0 function). By using a enum field with the value of Custom, > you can remove a value without affecting the numerical representation of the > other values. But doing that with the existing field won't help you, since > those values are already linear. So you would have to create another Status > field with the values you want, and then change ALL of the workflow (and > there's tons of it) that touches the Status field. Again, that seems like > massive overkill for a problem with far more simple solutions available. > > Rick > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Moore, Christopher Allen < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ** > > Hey Rick- > > > > Thanks for the response! > > > > And error message was an initial consideration as well, but one we'd like > to avoid. It seems messy to the customer if there is an option in the list > they can't use. If there's a good reason not to do it either of the other > ways I mentioned though (potential upgrade issues down the road) then the > pop-up error message may be the best choice. Any reason you can think of to > not take it out of the drop down via another method? > > > > Thanks! > > Chris > > > > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Rick Cook > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:54 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Removing Pending status as a choice > > > > ** Well, here's a third option. Create an Active Link that fires when the > status is changed to Pending. Make the actions whatever you want - a > message explaining to the user that Pending is verboten, changing Status to > something else, whatever. I would also make a Filter that validates the > value, to handle entry from outside the client. > > Rick > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Moore, Christopher Allen < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Ty- > > I'm not trying to delete the status reasons- I don't want the option for > people to choose Pending as a status at all. Unfortunately (in this > case) It's an attribute of the field, not a menu. The only way I can > think of to do that are the 2 I listed, but I'm open to other options! > > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of T. Dee > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:05 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Removing Pending status as a choice > > Do not delete the Pending Statuses - mark them offline in SYS:Status > Reason Menu Items. Simply add new ones to the SYS:Status Reason Menu > Items. As well don't forget to get them to the hidden field Status > Reason. > > As well remember about the Process Flow you have to modify the records > in VIS:ProcessAcceleratorItem - set the status to offline for the ones > you don't want and add new records for new Pending Statuses. > > Hope that helps. > > Ty > > > On 3/12/08, Moore, Christopher Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > ** > > > > > > Hey everyone- > > > > > > > > 7.0 > > > > SQL > > > > Windows 2000 > > > > > > > > We have a requirement to get rid of Pending as a status on CHG. There > are a > > couple of ways I can think of offhand to do it but I wanted some > advice > > first. > > > > > > > > First option, delete the status pending from the field and give custom > IDs > > to the other choices so the number is skipped and the other choices > don't > > get moved up in the list. > > > > > > > > Second option, hide the status field, make a new status field with > only the > > choices we want and then do a 'set fields' action on save and modify > to the > > original hidden status field. > > > > > > > > My main concern is the "wizard"- how to handle that part. I haven't > really > > looked t it yet though- it may be simple. > > > > > > > > Any advice/thoughts on how best to handle this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > Chris__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" > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > html___ > > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > html___ > > > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > html___ > __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"
