Thats exactly why I prefer functional names over names that describe what 
exactly the AL does unless that AL is specifically doing that without being a 
part of a bigger function.

By functional names I mean if there is a set of AL's or Filters that run either 
as a guide or otherwise, that perform a specific function such as 
SetCustomerInfo or RetreiveUserData or whatever with a postfix of 01, 02, 03 to 
signify the number of AL's within that..

I have had time when I had to insert AL's or Filters in patches of the apps I 
build which I do by putting additional postfixes.. such as 01a, 01b. At some 
places I did have the luxury of renaming the AL or Filter to make way for new 
AL's or Filters.

The biggest advantage of doing this is easily finding the piece of code you are 
after if you are trouble shooting a particular function that may be causing a 
problem..

Joe




________________________________
From: David Sanders <david.sand...@westoverconsulting.co.uk>
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 1:39:12 PM
Subject: Re: ITSM naming convention sucks

Hi Doug

In my opinion there are problems with trying to do too much with naming
conventions for workflow.  

One of the principal problems is in applying enhancements to an existing 
application - if you add actions to an active link, do you change the name? If 
so, your delta definitions file needs to contain a disabled version of the 
object being replaced, and the new object with the new name too. I try to avoid 
this unless the active link actions are radically altered so that the existing 
name would be misleading.

What do you do when an active link has 25 actions??

I see no point in trying to include firing conditions in the object name 
(window open, menu choice etc.) as these can be seen in the object list in the 
admin tool.

In ESS active links tend to be named with abbreviations for  
<APP>:<FORM/SHR>-<btn>TextDescription<nn> where <nn> is a sequence number for 
related workflow if appropriate.  They might also contain a suffix Nm/Dlg to 
indicate if that workflow is designed to run specifically for normal windows, 
or modal dialog windows.

For filters, the only difference is to include the filter execution order like 
<APP>:<FORM/SHR>-620TextDescription<nn> where 620 is the execution order. This 
lists most filters in the order they will fire.

In other words, we try to keep the naming convention as simple as possible 
while still giving useful information, but retaining existing object names 
where possible to make applying enhancements easier.

As far as support is concerned, you break it and we'll help you fix it. Period. 
We normally set up copies of client's servers including any customizations so 
that we can easily troubleshoot issues with them. And support costs you no more 
for 2000 users than it does for 20 users - fixed price.

David Sanders
Remedy Solution Architect
Enterprise Service Suite @ Work
==========================

tel +44 1494 468980
mobile +44 7710 377761
email david.sand...@westoverconsulting.co.uk

web http://www.westoverconsulting.co.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Tanner, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:58 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ITSM naming convention sucks

Another reason to write/construct you own solution and follow best practices in 
naming conventions/documentation/etc. Been doing Remedy for 13+ years, logical 
naming of objects is important - Custom or OTB.

Oh the days of Remedy - Your Business, Your Way! 

Doug Tanner

Gidd how about you, how does ESS standardize naming conventions?


-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Lyle Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 11:50 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ITSM naming convention sucks

I don't think so.  They will support the applications out of the box.  They 
won't support customizations.  If you break something with your customizations, 
they are not obligated to help you figure out how you broke it.  They might, 
but they might not.  They are also not necessarily obligated to help you 
understand their workflow, unless it relates to a documented integration 
point.  Many of the whitepapers they provide are nice, but not strictly 
necessary.

Understand that I would love it if BMC documented their systems better.  I just 
don't think that the statement that it is necessary that they document their 
naming conventions, or the implied statement that they should document other 
implementation details, is correct.  It would be great if they did, but they 
are under no obligation to do so.

Lyle

-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of David.M Clark
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 9:36 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ITSM naming convention sucks

I think that paying for support says otherwise... except for that "easy" part.

David M Clark
Remedy Programmer/Analyst


>>> Lyle Taylor <tayl...@ldschurch.org> 3/24/2009 10:06 AM >>>
Strictly speaking, ITSM is BMC's product, and they are under no obligation to 
provide us with any of the nitty-gritty details about how their application was 
written including any naming conventions used internally, etc.  The fact that 
BMC allows you to customize the product doesn't mean they need to support you 
in that effort or to make it easy for you.

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Coleman, Gavin
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:56 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: ITSM naming convention sucks

**
"In my opinion, ITSP followed some best naming conventions."

Well considering that as far as know the naming convention is not explained 
anywhere in the ITSP or ITSM documentation, I can't see how you can believe 
that. Remedy allows you up to 80 characters to name workflow items, and it 
seems that ITSP and ITSM does not use all of these characters. My Active Link 
workflow has a naming convention as follows


1.  Prefix for custom work (CC_)
2.  Form abbreviation (NIM:) - New Incident Console
3.  Execute on abbreviation (MRC - Menu Row Choice, Btn - Button, WL - Window 
Loaded). If more than one Execute on is specified, then the abbreviation I use 
is the most relevant
4.  Name of Button, Table, Field etc (E.g. Btn_OpenIncidentTask)
5.  Execution Order (-000-)
6.  Details of Actions (OpenHelpDesk)

Thus, we get

CC_NIM:Btn_OpenIncidentTask-000-OpenHelpDesk

If an AL or Filter is part of a Guide, then the suffix _GUIDE is applied. If 
the AL or Filter calls a Guide, then the suffix _CallGuide is applied.

I'm sure other people have naming conventions, but if you are providing a 
product that is to be released to the general public, then surely publishing 
the naming convention in your documentation is ESSENTIAL.

Just my £0.02 worth!


Gavin Coleman
Senior Analyst/Programmer
Computacenter (UK) Ltd
Services & Solutions
Hatfield Avenue
Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9TW, United Kingdom
T: +44 (0) 1707 631662
E: gavin.cole...@computacenter.com 
W: www.computacenter.com




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

Reply via email to