In the 'old days', we used "Prefixing" as you have mentioned.

 

Now we have chosen to use "Postfixing" instead, this allows the
Work-flow-object (AL,Filter,guide..) to be listed "next to each other"
in the admin tool.

 

When customizing, we might DISABLE the OTB object, then clone it (Save
as) and put a "_IFX" at the end, tweak it, and then enable it.

 

We elected to use the _ because it can be used to parse the object name.
Note that we have discussed internally using 2 of the _ characters for
better parsing as some OTB objects have a single _ in them.

 

Remember that an "upgrade" should not ENABLE a disabled object, but will
IMPORT it if it is deleted.

 

However, you will quickly want to prevent your Administrators and
Incident/Problem Investigators from using the output of WECSOG on
themselves... having "it works this way for them, and that way for those
guys" is quite confusing say the least when trouble-shooting, and
training, and...

Thanks-n-advance; 

HDT Platform Incident / Problem Manager & Architect 
Robert Molenda 
IT OS PA 
Tel: +1 408 503 2701 
Fax: +1 408 503 2912 
Mobile: +1 408 472 8097 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Quality begins with your actions.

 

________________________________

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Rentfrow
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 8:21 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Workflow naming for multi-tenancy

 

Has anyone come up with a workflow naming convention that includes
multi-tenancy as part of the naming?

 

For example, In previous version of application being customized for the
ACME corporation you might have named a new active link on the
HPD:HelpDesk form something like this:

 

ACM:HPD:ThisIsMyNewActiveLink

 

We are now doing minor customizations that are company specific - the
logical approach is to just add another layer in the mix.  So the WECSOG
(Wile E. Coyote School of Gunsmithing) division of ACME might have an
active link named something like....

 

ACM:WECSOG:HPD:ThisIsMyNewActiveLink

 

This seems solid enough - but I'd like to hear any other strategies
people might have come up with for doing company-specific customizations
while utilizing multi-tenancy.

 

William Rentfrow, Principal Consultant

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

C 701-306-6157

O 952-432-0227

 

__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the 
Answers Are"

Reply via email to