Hi,
Why would you want different actions to run in different phases? Do you
have any good user case?
I would guess that the need arise very seldom.
In that case I think we can split the filter into two filters instead.
Adding granularity to what we can control, also makes the possibilities
for errors and mistakes much greater...
Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11):
* RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing.
* RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs.
Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se.
> While you'll brought out this idea, if at all BMC ever intends to change
> the
> way this works along the lines of your ideas, it would be even cooler if
> they changed it in such a way that you could control the specific phase
> you
> would like each action within a filter to run after you check that check
> box
> to override default phasing.. options like Default to let the action run
> on
> the default phase, Phase 1, Phase 2 etc for every action in that Filter so
> you could choose what action you would like the override..
>
> That would probably add a lot more control than just saying - ok all
> actions
> run on phase 1 with the `! convention..
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grooms, Frederick W
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 10:40 AM Newsgroups:
> public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
>
> I had put in a RFE back in 2010 to change the `! into a "Phase Override"
> radio button, but it was closed. I had suggested the radio
> button/dropdown
> so we could override the phase in all directions (I can see times where we
> would want a filter to run in Phase 4, such as if we have to push to on
> outside system after all processing is complete on a record)
>
> Fred
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rod Harris
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 7:14 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Commit Changes vs PERFORM ACTION APPLY
>
> ** Yeah Misi,
>
> I'm a bit surprised that the run process commands have grown so much
> faster
> than the actions. I guess it's quicker to develop features as Run Process
> commands rather than have dev studio hold our hand and check the syntax
> and
> context on entry. I know that it wouldn't be practical to expect every run
> process to be implemented as an action but for some of the very common
> ones
> it would make a lot of sense. A business time command would be nice. The
> syntax on those process commands is darn tricky even for experts.
>
> The other thing that has surprised me is that the odd `! naming convention
> for overriding filter phasing has survived all these years. Surely it
> would
> be much nicer to have a simple check box field or something to indicate
> this. It would be easy enough to phase out the old method over time and
> just
> auto set the new check box if the name ended in `!
>
> I'm not a fan of the mechanics of a piece of code featuring in the name. I
> think it should describe what it does rather than how it does it. If you
> change how it does it then you have to change its name also. In Remedy
> since
> the name of an active link or filter etc. is the key you have a problem
> with
> version control if you keep changing the names of things. If you leave the
> name the same despite changing how things are done then your naming
> convention becomes compromised.
>
> There's a lot I love about Remedy and it does keep getting better but I'd
> like it if these couple of things were improved.
>
> Rod Harris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> On 12 December 2011 16:32, Misi Mladoniczky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I definitely vote for Commit Changes!
>
> Why use the ugly Run-Process bla bla bla syntax, when you have an action
> that does the same thing?
>
> Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
>
> Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11):
> * RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing.
> * RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs.
> Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se.
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> That's a good question Mark. I'm not aware of any differences that would
>> make one more efficient than the other. Personally I prefer to use the
>> "Commit Changes" as it seems cleaner to use this rather than one of many
>> run process commands.
>>
>> Rod Harris
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> On 9 December 2011 04:51, Brittain, Mark wrote:
>>>
>>> HI All,****
>>>
>>> Commit Changes vs. PERFORM ACTION APPLY. Is one better to use than the
>>> other on ARS 6.3?****
>>>
>>> I have one active link that populates data from a SQL query and a
>>> second
>>> active link to commit the changes. These were probably created under
>>> ARS
>>> 3
>>> or 4. The Commit Changes does the job but always looking to smart way
>>> to
>>> do
>>> things.****
>>>
>>> Thanks****
>>> Mark ****
>>>
>>>
>>> *Mark Brittain*
>>> Remedy Developer****
>>> *NaviSite - **A Time Warner Cable Company*
>>> mbritt...@navisite.com****
>>> Office: 315-453-2912 x5335****
>>> Mobile: 315-317-2897****
>>> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
