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"