What I would ask here is What does it mean to Approve or Reject a Latent change?
If I Approve, OK, it is already done so what differnce does it make? If I Reject, problem, it is already done so what difference does it make? If a reject means you want to undo the change -- really, what you are doing is making ANOTHER change. The first change happened. You are now making another one to change back. In a Latent Change, the concept of approval doesn't make sense. You may want NOTIFICATION to appropriate people to occur because they didn't get advance notice in the form of approval and need to be told that the change occurred (for awareness at least and maybe to decide whether to request a change back). The point here is not to try and use approval for notification purposes but for approval purposes. Use Notification for notification purposes. Now, the question might be how do I have the appropriate notifications go out for Latent Change.... That is a different question (and not one I have the answer for). Doug Mueller ________________________________ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Rick Cook Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 8:20 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: ******** Change issues Classification > "Timing" "Timing Reason" etc. ** My first impression was that your company is attempting to use non-ITIL processes in an ITIL software package. That will cause problems similar to what you are seeing. Could I suggest that you attempt to get your people to use the proper process, rather than tweak the software to enforce an improper process? Rick On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Enslin Van Blerk - MWEB <evanbl...@mweb.com<mailto:evanbl...@mweb.com>> wrote: ** Hi I require your assistance please. I don't really work with the Change management module thus I am a bit in the dark here, asking this question. We have occasions where people will do a change in production and then 3hours later, they want to log the change and resolve it etc. According to what I found in the documentation these changes can be logged as a Latent Change and will then close automatically. We can use this but it is not always the case and sometimes for record purposes we still require people to approve. People log tickets as an emergency in these situations and because this was logged as an emergency we cannot close the ticket because it was logged after the actual start dates. First we get a message, telling us it will be saved to Expedited because the Requested Date is before the earliest Start Date. I will save it as expedited, enter the times for actual start/end date. Then it will tell me, Only Latent changes can have actual start dates that come after the infrastructure change submit date. At this point we have values in "Earliest Start Date" and "Submitted Date" If we try to save the timing field to latent we just receive ARNOTE again telling us it will be saved to Expedited because the Requested Date is before the earliest Start Date. We are not able to close this change with the correct times now, what can we do with these situations? Regards Enslin ________________________________ <http://www.mweb.co.za/productsservices/> This electronic communication and the attached file(s) are subject to a disclaimer which can be accessed on the following link: Disclaimer<http://www.mweb.co.za/disclaimer> - or copy the following URL into your browser - http://www.mweb.co.za/disclaimer. If you are unable to view the disclaimer, please contact ab...@mweb.com<mailto:ab...@mweb.com> for a copy. ________________________________ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com<http://www.wwrug.com/> ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
