CTM:Email System Customization

[Kevin M Candelaria]

Hello Arslist,



I am starting to learn to work with Development studio and have been wanting to 
make a change to CTM Email System.

Id like to add a CC and BCC field to it.



I have designed the form on our development platform but now just need the 
workflow to make it actually work. Any tips or pointers would be appreciated.




Regards,
Kevin C.




___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Preserving customization during upgrade

[Jason Miller]

Hi James,

You can also see how the AMIGO program works out for you.  See AMIGO
Program for ITSM Applications Suite
.

If you are looking for expert advice on planning an ITSM upgrade, then
AMIGO is here to help.



The *A*ssisted *MIG*ration *O*peration is a program designed to assist
customers with the planning of Remedy IT Service Management Suite upgrades.
This program is now available to all Remedy ITSM customers in Americas and
EMEA regions.


Jason


On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Vivek Patil  wrote:

> Hi,
>BMC has published 'Cook-book for ITSM Suite 81 Upgrade' document on BMC
> Remedy
> 
> Community group. This document is available on the same blog post on which
> we had uploaded ITSM Upgrade to 8.1 webinar recording.
>
> Please click here<
> https://communities.bmc.com/community/bmcdn/bmc_it_service_support/blog/2013/08/07/upgrading-to-bmc-remedy-81-things-that-you-really-need-to-know>
> to check the BMC Community blog post.
>
> This document contain guidelines which customers can use when upgrading to
> ITSM Suite 8.1. Customers can also customize this document as required for
> their specific scenarios.
>
> So , please refer the Cook Book .
>
> Thanks
> Vivek
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Preserving customization during upgrade

[Vivek Patil]

Hi,
   BMC has published ‘Cook-book for ITSM Suite 81 Upgrade’ document on BMC 
Remedy
 Community 
group. This document is available on the same blog post on which we had 
uploaded ITSM Upgrade to 8.1 webinar recording.

Please click 
here
 to check the BMC Community blog post.

This document contain guidelines which customers can use when upgrading to ITSM 
Suite 8.1. Customers can also customize this document as required for their 
specific scenarios.

So , please refer the Cook Book .

Thanks
Vivek

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Preserving customization during upgrade

[Sweety]

James,

You can check with BMC also for suggestions. They have engaged special teams 
for upgrades to help customers to move to latest version of remedy.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Preserving customization during upgrade

[SUBSCRIBE arslist Aditya Sharma]

You can then use AR migrator to compare those objects to identify the changes. 
You will have to have a reference server in place.

Regards,
Aditya

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from !DEA

-Original Message-
From: Roger Justice 
Sender:   "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)" 

Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:13:57 
To: 
Reply-To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Preserving customization during upgrade


By running the Best Practice Conversion Utility (BPCU) in the report mode you 
will obtain a list of objects that have been modified not the exact change.




-Original Message-
From: James Smith 
To: arslist 
Sent: Thu, Apr 10, 2014 11:07 am
Subject: Preserving customization during upgrade


Good Morning Guys,
Stuck with a question and thought this is the place to get it clarified.
I have an old ARS and ITSM 7.5 systems and got the requirement from client to 
pgrade it to 8.1. I am uncertain of the customizations done and new forms and 
ields added in the system.
Do you guys see an easy way to check all the customizations in the system and 
ove them to 8.1?
Cheers,
ames
___
NSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Preserving customization during upgrade

[Roger Justice]

By running the Best Practice Conversion Utility (BPCU) in the report mode you 
will obtain a list of objects that have been modified not the exact change.




-Original Message-
From: James Smith 
To: arslist 
Sent: Thu, Apr 10, 2014 11:07 am
Subject: Preserving customization during upgrade


Good Morning Guys,
Stuck with a question and thought this is the place to get it clarified.
I have an old ARS and ITSM 7.5 systems and got the requirement from client to 
pgrade it to 8.1. I am uncertain of the customizations done and new forms and 
ields added in the system.
Do you guys see an easy way to check all the customizations in the system and 
ove them to 8.1?
Cheers,
ames
___
NSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Preserving customization during upgrade

[James Smith]

Good Morning Guys,

Stuck with a question and thought this is the place to get it clarified.

I have an old ARS and ITSM 7.5 systems and got the requirement from client to 
upgrade it to 8.1. I am uncertain of the customizations done and new forms and 
fields added in the system.

Do you guys see an easy way to check all the customizations in the system and 
move them to 8.1?

Cheers,
James

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: SRM 7.6.4 Customization

[Rafael Rodriguez]

**
Thanks Jason, we are trying to get request approved to go straight to SRM 8.1 but obviously that will not happen probably for the next 6-8 months. So was just looking for any information that we can provide sooner than later.

Rafael
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

Re: SRM 7.6.4 Customization

[Jason Miller]

Are you looking at upgrading to SRM 8 any time soon? There is a huge UI
improvement where the different tiers do not completely change the layout
as you noted.

Jason
On Nov 7, 2013 10:25 AM, "Rafael Rodriguez"  wrote:

> ** Good afternoon list, Wanted to find out if anyone has successfully been
> able to customize the look and feel of SRM Request Console? Here is our
> challange. OOB functionality - If you create multi-tier categories and
> attach to an SRD then try to navigate you get the following results: 1) 1st
> Category or Tier 1 display as cells/tiles. 2) Click browse sub-categories
> for Category 2/Tier 2 and the display shows up as white background with
> links (Looks Horrible). We are looking customize it so the 2nd tier either
> looks similar to Category 1 display or at least looks presentable. We are
> using SRM 7.6.4 SP3 Any suggestion would be appreciated. Thanks Rafael
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: SRM 7.6.4 Customization

[Sanford, Claire]

Check out this link…

https://communities.bmc.com/docs/DOC-23501


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rafael Rodriguez
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:25 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: SRM 7.6.4 Customization

** Good afternoon list, Wanted to find out if anyone has successfully been able 
to customize the look and feel of SRM Request Console? Here is our challange. 
OOB functionality - If you create multi-tier categories and attach to an SRD 
then try to navigate you get the following results: 1) 1st Category or Tier 1 
display as cells/tiles. 2) Click browse sub-categories for Category 2/Tier 2 
and the display shows up as white background with links (Looks Horrible). We 
are looking customize it so the 2nd tier either looks similar to Category 1 
display or at least looks presentable. We are using SRM 7.6.4 SP3 Any 
suggestion would be appreciated. Thanks Rafael _ARSlist: "Where the Answers 
Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

SRM 7.6.4 Customization

[Rafael Rodriguez]

**
Good afternoon list,

Wanted to find out if anyone has successfully been able to customize the look and feel of SRM Request Console? Here is our challange. OOB functionality - If you create multi-tier categories and attach to an SRD then try to navigate you get the following results: 1) 1st Category or Tier 1 display as cells/tiles. 2) Click browse sub-categories for Category 2/Tier 2 and the display shows up as white background with links (Looks Horrible). 

We are looking customize it so the 2nd tier either looks similar to Category 1 display or at least looks presentable.

We are using SRM 7.6.4 SP3

Any suggestion would be appreciated.

Thanks

Rafael
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

Re: Customization

[Ars Lister]

PS:  BMC does not have the staff to support the 28+ thousand customers they 
have in the US alone (at least that was the number given to me by a BMC Sales 
Engineer).  They don't have to compete against contractors.  There's not enough 
really good contractors either (a lot of pretenders but just a handful of 
seasoned contractors).  So there's more than enough pie for everyone to eat.  
The salespeople need to stop setting you all up for a market you are not able 
to fully support.  We are all in this together.  




On , Ars Lister  wrote:
  
I will say, BMC Salespeople are killing their own business.  They are notorious 
for telling clients "no customizations" to 
 
1)  Mitigate the lack of training to developers making changes in earlier 
versions that do not know how to maintain the integrity of out-of-the-box 
workflow.  This lack of knowledge creates disasters for upgrades and therefore 
disasters for BMC.  Instead of BMC including how to properly customize OOTB 
workflow in their developer training courses, they have adopted the "no 
customization" mantra for a highly customizable software platform.  Remedy's 
niche in the market is its flexibility.  And they just scrapped it and wonder 
why other companies are gaining market share.  Silly.

2) Drive up dependency and sales for their support and their internal 
Professional Services team that offers Remedy developers at 3 to 4 times a 
senior contractor rate (literally).  The irony is that a few of them are really 
good, but a lot of them are novices/mid-level and yet the bill rate is 
ridiculous.  But their salespeople make clients feel like the only way to 
properly customize their customizable product is to use BMC resources.

3)  They don't realize they are literally killing their own product and 
opening the door for major clients to try out the competition like Service Now 
and Saleforce.  It's idiocracy but it's consistent idiocracy.  lol

4)  A lot of them are not techies and really don't know the product.  But 
they are assumed to so clients trust them and their word, as wrong as it is, is 
perceived to be Gold.  

BMC, if you're monitoring this list, I urge you to grab up your sales team and 
educate them.  They are killing a great product.  And with these hotfixes going 
right into the Base Development for basic stuff that would normally go into an 
Overlay in versions 7.6.04 and beyond, your salespeople are actually reopening 
the disasters that you all were averting with the Overlay concept in the first 
place.  It's got to stop if you want to maintain and grow your market share.  
Seasoned developers should not have to fight their clients to help them...



On Thursday, October 24, 2013 9:50 PM, Susan Palmer  
wrote:
  
** 
My  experience  has paralleled Jason's.  Never having worked 'federal' I've 
only experienced it from a company perspective.  

I don't even bother to add BMC people as contacts since they change before I 
need to contact them.  There's been meetings with our support provider where 
the  invited BMC person was a no-show without notice. 

Back in 1996 or 1997 Doug made a visit to my company at the time at our 
request.  We were custom,  which of course was the way it was then, but it made 
 a difference in executive appreciation for what 'Remedy' could do and had a 
very positive impact.  Granted there weren't as many customers then, but don't 
discount the impact Doug can have.  Don't assume  you have to settle for less. 

Sometimes a  sales person is exactly just  a 'sales' person.  You don't always 
want the 'presentation' you want plain talk that is not just, 'of course we can 
do it'.  (but just try and actually do it)  You want the technical supporting 
information that will make you believe you really can get there, not just the 
hype. 

Susan





On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Jason Miller  wrote:

** 
>Alright, one overdue reply down, one more to go.
>
>LJ and Koyb already touched on that Doug is a wonderful resource for an 
>organization struggling.  He understands the vision, what the tools can and 
>can't do as well as can relay that information to executives or techies.  He 
>is excellent at explaining why a customer who thinks they want to do something 
>may not really want to do that something.  Or at least bring reality into the 
>picture when expectations from a tool are too high.
>
>So now we get to the local sales person (yes, this is meant to be ranty).  I 
>think the first thing to point out is Federal/public sector has much more 
>sales loyalty.  The three replies that apparently find there local sales 
>people useful are associated with the public sector.  I spent some time on a 
>govt. contract and was thrilled at the level of support and interaction.  I 
>felt ba

Re: Customization

[Ars Lister]

I will say, BMC Salespeople are killing their own business.  They are notorious 
for telling clients "no customizations" to 
 
1)  Mitigate the lack of training to developers making changes in earlier 
versions that do not know how to maintain the integrity of out-of-the-box 
workflow.  This lack of knowledge creates disasters for upgrades and therefore 
disasters for BMC.  Instead of BMC including how to properly customize OOTB 
workflow in their developer training courses, they have adopted the "no 
customization" mantra for a highly customizable software platform.  Remedy's 
niche in the market is its flexibility.  And they just scrapped it and wonder 
why other companies are gaining market share.  Silly.

2) Drive up dependency and sales for their support and their internal 
Professional Services team that offers Remedy developers at 3 to 4 times a 
senior contractor rate (literally).  The irony is that a few of them are really 
good, but a lot of them are novices/mid-level and yet the bill rate is 
ridiculous.  But their salespeople make clients feel like the only way to 
properly customize their customizable product is to use BMC resources.

3)  They don't realize they are literally killing their own product and 
opening the door for major clients to try out the competition like Service Now 
and Saleforce.  It's idiocracy but it's consistent idiocracy.  lol

4)  A lot of them are not techies and really don't know the product.  But 
they are assumed to so clients trust them and their word, as wrong as it is, is 
perceived to be Gold.  

BMC, if you're monitoring this list, I urge you to grab up your sales team and 
educate them.  They are killing a great product.  And with these hotfixes going 
right into the Base Development for basic stuff that would normally go into an 
Overlay in versions 7.6.04 and beyond, your salespeople are actually reopening 
the disasters that you all were averting with the Overlay concept in the first 
place.  It's got to stop if you want to maintain and grow your market share.  
Seasoned developers should not have to fight their clients to help them...



On Thursday, October 24, 2013 9:50 PM, Susan Palmer  
wrote:
  
** 
My  experience  has paralleled Jason's.  Never having worked 'federal' I've 
only experienced it from a company perspective.  

I don't even bother to add BMC people as contacts since they change before I 
need to contact them.  There's been meetings with our support provider where 
the  invited BMC person was a no-show without notice. 

Back in 1996 or 1997 Doug made a visit to my company at the time at our 
request.  We were custom,  which of course was the way it was then, but it made 
 a difference in executive appreciation for what 'Remedy' could do and had a 
very positive impact.  Granted there weren't as many customers then, but don't 
discount the impact Doug can have.  Don't assume  you have to settle for less. 

Sometimes a  sales person is exactly just  a 'sales' person.  You don't always 
want the 'presentation' you want plain talk that is not just, 'of course we can 
do it'.  (but just try and actually do it)  You want the technical supporting 
information that will make you believe you really can get there, not just the 
hype. 

Susan





On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Jason Miller  wrote:

** 
>Alright, one overdue reply down, one more to go.
>
>LJ and Koyb already touched on that Doug is a wonderful resource for an 
>organization struggling.  He understands the vision, what the tools can and 
>can't do as well as can relay that information to executives or techies.  He 
>is excellent at explaining why a customer who thinks they want to do something 
>may not really want to do that something.  Or at least bring reality into the 
>picture when expectations from a tool are too high.
>
>So now we get to the local sales person (yes, this is meant to be ranty).  I 
>think the first thing to point out is Federal/public sector has much more 
>sales loyalty.  The three replies that apparently find there local sales 
>people useful are associated with the public sector.  I spent some time on a 
>govt. contract and was thrilled at the level of support and interaction.  I 
>felt bad for our AM because the Federal customer would ask for things I 
>personally felt were unreasonable but she would usually find a way to pull it 
>off or find an alternative that was acceptable for the customer.
>
>Now I have been back in the private sector for the last 5 years.  I can't 
>decided if I change the oil in my car more often than our account manager 
>changes.  I must admit that we had a great run (in BMC custom terms) where we 
>not only had the same AM for a few year but also he had a wonderful SE.  In 
>the course o

Re: Customization

[Jason Miller]

't want our AM to talk to our upper management (or
>> anybody in IT for that matter).  My experience has been because of the
>> frequent turnover they are typically too green and our IT dept would rip
>> them after a few questions that couldn't be answered (admittedly we can be
>> a tough crowd).  This is where I added "me too" about having Doug talk to
>> our IT leadership because I have zero confidence in most people from BMC
>> that get sent our way.   There absolutely have been exceptions but that is
>> just it, they were exceptions.
>>
>> I am very supportive of many aspects of Remedy, BMC, Support,
>> Engineering, etc. but the sales/local contact side typically I don't find
>> very useful unless you have money in your hand.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Koyb P. Liabt wrote:
>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Actually I was chiming in as a reply to another person who had mentioned
>>> Doug.  Although yes I think it would be great if he did speak with them - I
>>> would NEVER ask Doug to speak to our team.  This is not Doug's obligation.
>>> However, yes I do think he would be very influential in this situation.
>>> When I hear Doug speak - I am very much persuaded, and his communication
>>> has been crystal clear to me.  Our Management decision makers are technical
>>> Managers  (i.e. software / infrastructure / architects etc) so we need a
>>> heavy hitter on the technical side.   Our company is large.  It's
>>> unfortunate that this miscommunication is happening, and the adverse info
>>> is being communicated through our organization about a good product.  Our
>>> Account rep does not have the type of relationship with our Management in
>>> which they would even listen.
>>>
>>> 
>>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
>>> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *richard@bwc.state.oh.us
>>> *Sent:* Monday, October 21, 2013 7:33 AM
>>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>>>
>>>  ** **
>>>
>>> ** 
>>>
>>> Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local
>>> salesperson or technical person. Don’t
>>>
>>> you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech
>>> person?
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
>>> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *Koyb
>>> P. Liabt
>>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 5:56 PM
>>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> *Subject:* Customization
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> ** 
>>>
>>> **
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> That's a scary thought. I hope they do not have this point of view with
>>> any other application.  It's unfortunate because BMC is a really good
>>> product, however our  Managers are sending out this bad publicity due to a
>>> lack of understanding of the BMC products.  When I try to explain - it's
>>> like talking to sheet rock.  Nice people, but I'm not sure why they are not
>>> listening to the professional recommendations the BMC SMEs that they
>>> hire.  Meanwhile we have all these great BMC tools and we are not
>>> leveraging the technology. 
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> A year ago, I created 1 field in a regular table. I heard noise about it
>>> of course - my phone was ringing right away.  I was told this new field
>>> made them really "nervous" and code changes are not allowed - contact BMC
>>> for a hotfix instead.  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this.  I
>>> wish Doug would have a chat with them.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
>>> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *arslist
>>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 4:35 PM
>>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>> ** 
>>>
>>> Does your company have the same unrealistic view of all application
>>> software or only BMC’s?
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Feels like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of it.
>>&g

Re: Customization

[Susan Palmer]

t side typically I don't find very useful
> unless you have money in your hand.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:
>
>> ** **
>>
>> 
>> 
>> Actually I was chiming in as a reply to another person who had mentioned
>> Doug.  Although yes I think it would be great if he did speak with them - I
>> would NEVER ask Doug to speak to our team.  This is not Doug's obligation.
>> However, yes I do think he would be very influential in this situation.
>> When I hear Doug speak - I am very much persuaded, and his communication
>> has been crystal clear to me.  Our Management decision makers are technical
>> Managers  (i.e. software / infrastructure / architects etc) so we need a
>> heavy hitter on the technical side.   Our company is large.  It's
>> unfortunate that this miscommunication is happening, and the adverse info
>> is being communicated through our organization about a good product.  Our
>> Account rep does not have the type of relationship with our Management in
>> which they would even listen.
>>
>> 
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
>> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *richard@bwc.state.oh.us
>> *Sent:* Monday, October 21, 2013 7:33 AM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>>
>>  ** **
>>
>> ** 
>>
>> Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local
>> salesperson or technical person. Don’t
>>
>> you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech
>> person?
>>
>>  
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
>> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *Koyb P.
>> Liabt
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 5:56 PM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Customization
>>
>>  
>>
>> ** 
>>
>> **
>>
>>  
>>
>> That's a scary thought. I hope they do not have this point of view with
>> any other application.  It's unfortunate because BMC is a really good
>> product, however our  Managers are sending out this bad publicity due to a
>> lack of understanding of the BMC products.  When I try to explain - it's
>> like talking to sheet rock.  Nice people, but I'm not sure why they are not
>> listening to the professional recommendations the BMC SMEs that they
>> hire.  Meanwhile we have all these great BMC tools and we are not
>> leveraging the technology. 
>>
>>  
>>
>> A year ago, I created 1 field in a regular table. I heard noise about it
>> of course - my phone was ringing right away.  I was told this new field
>> made them really "nervous" and code changes are not allowed - contact BMC
>> for a hotfix instead.  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this.  I
>> wish Doug would have a chat with them.
>>
>>  
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
>> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *arslist
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 4:35 PM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>>
>>   
>>
>> ** 
>>
>> Does your company have the same unrealistic view of all application
>> software or only BMC’s?
>>
>>  
>>
>> Feels like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of it.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
>> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *Koyb P.
>> Liabt
>> *Sent:* October 18, 2013 11:06 AM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>>
>>  
>>
>> ** 
>>
>> **
>>
>> We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we
>> have overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code
>> changes - and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)
>>
>>  
>>
>>   
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
>> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *Tauf
>> Chowdhury
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41 AM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>>
>>  
>>
>> ** 
>>
>> What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it 

Re: Customization

[Jason Miller]

Alright, one overdue reply down, one more to go.

LJ and Koyb already touched on that Doug is a wonderful resource for an
organization struggling.  He understands the vision, what the tools can and
can't do as well as can relay that information to executives or techies.
He is excellent at explaining why a customer who thinks they want to do
something may not really want to do that something.  Or at least bring
reality into the picture when expectations from a tool are too high.

So now we get to the local sales person (yes, this is meant to be ranty).
I think the first thing to point out is Federal/public sector has much more
sales loyalty.  The three replies that apparently find there local sales
people useful are associated with the public sector.  I spent some time on
a govt. contract and was thrilled at the level of support and interaction.
I felt bad for our AM because the Federal customer would ask for things I
personally felt were unreasonable but she would usually find a way to pull
it off or find an alternative that was acceptable for the customer.

Now I have been back in the private sector for the last 5 years.  I can't
decided if I change the oil in my car more often than our account manager
changes.  I must admit that we had a great run (in BMC custom terms) where
we not only had the same AM for a few year but also he had a wonderful SE.
In the course of a year or two they were helpful way beyond what I thought
was ever possible from BMC (in the private sector without spending
consulting money).  At one point I was pleasantly surprised to see Darius
walking down the hall of our office.  Unfortunately they are both no longer
with BMC and we seem to be back into the rotating AM cycle.  It is so bad
that we largely forget they exist except when we need to buy some licensees
and we need to research who we should be talking with.  I checked
support.bmc.com the other day where the AM is supposed to be listed and
there wasn't anybody there. Maybe BMC doesn't even know at the moment.  Ok
to be fair I think I roughly know who our AM is at the moment however I
have an email and voice mail from a new name that I need to get back to so
maybe it has changed again?.?.?.  Honestly I really have no desire to talk
to the next person in the rotation.  Shouldn't relationships be built?

There was mentioned of periodic visits earlier in this thread.  Except for
the span I mentioned we do not get visits.  I assume we don't spend
enough.  Technical person?  I had no idea that was even an option for many
years.  Until the SE previously mentioned the only time we saw a
"technical" person was when they were along with somebody trying to sell us
products.  Again, I figured we just don't spend enough.

Regarding having our AM helping with our challenges.  There have been times
when I wouldn't want our AM to talk to our upper management (or anybody in
IT for that matter).  My experience has been because of the frequent
turnover they are typically too green and our IT dept would rip them after
a few questions that couldn't be answered (admittedly we can be a tough
crowd).  This is where I added "me too" about having Doug talk to our IT
leadership because I have zero confidence in most people from BMC that get
sent our way.   There absolutely have been exceptions but that is just it,
they were exceptions.

I am very supportive of many aspects of Remedy, BMC, Support, Engineering,
etc. but the sales/local contact side typically I don't find very useful
unless you have money in your hand.

Jason


On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:

> ** **
>
> 
> 
> Actually I was chiming in as a reply to another person who had mentioned
> Doug.  Although yes I think it would be great if he did speak with them - I
> would NEVER ask Doug to speak to our team.  This is not Doug's obligation.
> However, yes I do think he would be very influential in this situation.
> When I hear Doug speak - I am very much persuaded, and his communication
> has been crystal clear to me.  Our Management decision makers are technical
> Managers  (i.e. software / infrastructure / architects etc) so we need a
> heavy hitter on the technical side.   Our company is large.  It's
> unfortunate that this miscommunication is happening, and the adverse info
> is being communicated through our organization about a good product.  Our
> Account rep does not have the type of relationship with our Management in
> which they would even listen.
>
> 
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *richard@bwc.state.oh.us
> *Sent:* Monday, October 21, 2013 7:33 AM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>
>  ** **
>
> ** 
>
> Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local
>

Customization

[Koyb P. Liabt]

Actually  I was chiming in as a reply to another person who had mentioned 
Doug.   Although yes I think it would be great if he did speak with them  - I 
would NEVER ask Doug to speak to our team.  This is not  Doug's obligation. 
 However, yes I do think he would be very influential in  this situation.  
When I hear Doug speak - I am very much  persuaded, and his communication 
has been crystal clear to  me.  Our Management decision makers are technical 
Managers  (i.e.  software / infrastructure / architects etc) so we need a 
heavy hitter on the  technical side.   Our company is large.  It's  unfortunate 
that this miscommunication is happening, and the adverse info is  being 
communicated through our organization about a good product.  Our  Account rep 
does not have the type of relationship with our  Management in which they 
would even listen. 
 
**
From: Action Request  System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of richard@bwc.state.oh.us
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 7:33  AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re:  Customization
 
 
**  
Just  asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local 
salesperson or  technical person. Don’t 
you  get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech  
person? 
 
From: Action Request  System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf  Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 5:56  PM
To: _arslist@ARSLIST.ORG_ (mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG) 
Subject:  Customization
**  
 
**
 

 
That's  a scary thought. I hope they do not have this point of view with 
any other  application.  It's unfortunate because BMC is a really good 
product,  however our  Managers are sending out this bad publicity due  to a 
lack 
of understanding of the BMC products.  When I  try to explain - it's like 
talking to sheet rock.  Nice people, but I'm  not sure why they are not 
listening to the professional  recommendations the BMC SMEs that they hire.  
Meanwhile we have  all these great BMC tools and we are not leveraging the  
technology. 
 

 
A  year ago, I created 1 field in a regular table. I heard noise about it  
of course - my phone was ringing right away.  I was told this new  field 
made them really "nervous" and code changes are not allowed - contact  BMC for 
a hotfix instead.  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around  this.  I wish 
Doug would have a chat with  them.
 

 

 
From:  Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf  Of arslist
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 4:35 PM
To:  _arslist@ARSLIST.ORG_ (mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG) 
Subject:  Re: Customization
 
 
**  
Does  your company have the same unrealistic view of all application 
software or  only BMC’s? 
Feels  like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of  it. 
Dan 
From:  Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On  Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: October 18, 2013 11:06  AM
To: _arslist@ARSLIST.ORG_ (mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG) 
Subject:  Re: Customization 
**   
** 
 
We  are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we  
have overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code  
changes - and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh  brother)
 

 
 
From:  Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On  Behalf Of Tauf Chowdhury
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41  AM
To: _arslist@ARSLIST.ORG_ (mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG) 
Subject:  Re: Customization
 
**   
 
What version are  you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" 
to customize the  system and every version, they try to take more and more 
customer  "customizations" and make them something you can configure within 
the  tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a version that  
supports overlays (7.6.04 +).  
 
It may then be a  good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy 
and explain to him  the negative opinion everyone has about the product and 
said comments  about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person 
will be  interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more 
business.  Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have a 
real,  in person, discussion with them about the direction of the product and 
 what you should/shouldn't do. 
 
Worst case  scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment 
to work in.  There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe 
Unisys is  hiring.
 
Hope this  helps.

 
 
On Fri, Oct 18,  2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt <_Tekkytommy@aol.com_ 
(mailto:tekkyto...@aol.com) >  wrote: 
**   
 
 
Hi,
 

 
We  have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no  
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a  "Hotfix." 
 
Management sta

Re: Customization

[LJ LongWing]

ButDoug is executive, and deals with executives every dayso he is
able to get down to the 1's and 0's if you want, but he is the most
convincing person I have ever talked to about the virtues of Remedy and why
everything works the way it doeswhile I would never ASK Doug to talk to
my boss for me about them being unreasonable in this situation...I think he
would be able to provide all levels of discussion and convince an Eskimo to
buy ice water.


On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 2:49 PM, David Charters <
da...@charterstechnologies.com> wrote:

> **
>
> I agree, in my experience with Doug, he is more like most of us. He is a
> techy. Account Execs need to handle management not techy people.
>
> ** **
>
> Sincerely,
>
> ** **
>
> David Charters
>
> Charters Technologies
>
> 317-331-8985
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Drew Shuller
> *Sent:* Monday, October 21, 2013 12:13 PM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>
>  ** **
>
> ** 
>
> Absolutely. Your sales rep should be available for a conference call with
> management. There are many, many instances where a salesperson can speak
> the language of management, so that they can better understand what should
> happen. 
>
> We had a sales rep named Aaron Duchak who answered every question and
> fulfilled every request that we ever asked of him. If it wasn't in his
> lane, he put us in contact with the right person. It was clear that he
> understood that success on our end meant success for him also. He's not our
> sales person any more...he got promoted to some kind of sales management
> position, probably tripled his income. 
>
> My point is that it is in your sales rep's best interest to be very
> receptive to this kind of request. And if he isn't, his boss would be. ***
> *
>
> Drew Shuller
>
> Soto Cano Air Base, Honduras
>
> On Oct 21, 2013 5:33 AM, "richard@bwc.state.oh.us" <
> richard@bwc.state.oh.us> wrote:
>
> ** 
>
> Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local
> salesperson or technical person. Don’t
>
> you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech
> person?
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ 
>  _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[David Charters]

I agree, in my experience with Doug, he is more like most of us. He is a
techy. Account Execs need to handle management not techy people.

 

Sincerely,

 

David Charters

Charters Technologies

317-331-8985

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Drew Shuller
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 12:13 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Customization

 

** 

Absolutely. Your sales rep should be available for a conference call with
management. There are many, many instances where a salesperson can speak the
language of management, so that they can better understand what should
happen. 

We had a sales rep named Aaron Duchak who answered every question and
fulfilled every request that we ever asked of him. If it wasn't in his lane,
he put us in contact with the right person. It was clear that he understood
that success on our end meant success for him also. He's not our sales
person any more...he got promoted to some kind of sales management position,
probably tripled his income. 

My point is that it is in your sales rep's best interest to be very
receptive to this kind of request. And if he isn't, his boss would be. 

Drew Shuller

Soto Cano Air Base, Honduras

On Oct 21, 2013 5:33 AM, "richard@bwc.state.oh.us"
 wrote:

** 

Just asking, but "why Doug" in these situations? Where is your local
salesperson or technical person. Don't

you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech
person?

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ 


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[Drew Shuller]

Absolutely. Your sales rep should be available for a conference call with
management. There are many, many instances where a salesperson can speak
the language of management, so that they can better understand what should
happen.

We had a sales rep named Aaron Duchak who answered every question and
fulfilled every request that we ever asked of him. If it wasn't in his
lane, he put us in contact with the right person. It was clear that he
understood that success on our end meant success for him also. He's not our
sales person any more...he got promoted to some kind of sales management
position, probably tripled his income.

My point is that it is in your sales rep's best interest to be very
receptive to this kind of request. And if he isn't, his boss would be.

Drew Shuller

Soto Cano Air Base, Honduras
On Oct 21, 2013 5:33 AM, "richard@bwc.state.oh.us" <
richard@bwc.state.oh.us> wrote:

> **
>
> Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local
> salesperson or technical person. Don’t
>
> you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech
> person?
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[Tauf Chowdhury]

Richard,
That was my initial thought as well. You would think the local BMC sales rep 
would be invested in the success of the product at this site. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 21, 2013, at 7:33 AM, "richard@bwc.state.oh.us" 
>  wrote:
> 
> **
> Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local 
> salesperson or technical person. Don’t
> you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech person?
>  
>  
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 5:56 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Customization
>  
> **
> **
>  
> That's a scary thought. I hope they do not have this point of view with any 
> other application.  It's unfortunate because BMC is a really good product, 
> however our  Managers are sending out this bad publicity due to a lack of 
> understanding of the BMC products.  When I try to explain - it's like talking 
> to sheet rock.  Nice people, but I'm not sure why they are not listening to 
> the professional recommendations the BMC SMEs that they hire.  Meanwhile we 
> have all these great BMC tools and we are not leveraging the technology. 
>  
> A year ago, I created 1 field in a regular table. I heard noise about it of 
> course - my phone was ringing right away.  I was told this new field made 
> them really "nervous" and code changes are not allowed - contact BMC for a 
> hotfix instead.  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this.  I wish Doug 
> would have a chat with them.
>  
>  
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of arslist
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 4:35 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Customization
>  
> **
> Does your company have the same unrealistic view of all application software 
> or only BMC’s?
>  
> Feels like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of it.
>  
> Dan
>  
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
> Sent: October 18, 2013 11:06 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Customization
>  
> **
> **
> We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we have 
> overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code changes - 
> and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)
>  
>  
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tauf Chowdhury
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Customization
>  
> **
> What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" to 
> customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more 
> customer "customizations" and make them something you can configure within 
> the tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a version that 
> supports overlays (7.6.04 +). 
> It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy and 
> explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and said 
> comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person will be 
> interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more business. 
> Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have a real, in 
> person, discussion with them about the direction of the product and what you 
> should/shouldn't do. 
> Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment to 
> work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe Unisys 
> is hiring.
> Hope this helps.
>  
> 
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:
> **
> Hi,
>  
> We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no 
> customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a 
> "Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I 
> believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was 
> communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be made 
> - their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their application."  
> For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company 
> wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.  
> This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."  
> (how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the data and are not 

Re: Customization

[richard....@bwc.state.oh.us]

Just asking, but “why Doug” in these situations? Where is your local 
salesperson or technical person. Don’t
you get periodic visits from them or have access to the regional tech person?


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 5:56 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Customization

**
**

That's a scary thought. I hope they do not have this point of view with any 
other application.  It's unfortunate because BMC is a really good product, 
however our  Managers are sending out this bad publicity due to a lack of 
understanding of the BMC products.  When I try to explain - it's like talking 
to sheet rock.  Nice people, but I'm not sure why they are not listening to the 
professional recommendations the BMC SMEs that they hire.  Meanwhile we have 
all these great BMC tools and we are not leveraging the technology.

A year ago, I created 1 field in a regular table. I heard noise about it of 
course - my phone was ringing right away.  I was told this new field made them 
really "nervous" and code changes are not allowed - contact BMC for a hotfix 
instead.  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this.  I wish Doug would have 
a chat with them.


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of arslist
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 4:35 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: Customization

**
Does your company have the same unrealistic view of all application software or 
only BMC’s?

Feels like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of it.

Dan

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: October 18, 2013 11:06 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: Customization

**
**
We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we have 
overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code changes - and 
BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tauf Chowdhury
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: Customization

**
What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" to 
customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more customer 
"customizations" and make them something you can configure within the tool. So 
I guess the first question is if you are on a version that supports overlays 
(7.6.04 +).
It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy and 
explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and said 
comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person will be 
interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more business. Ask 
him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have a real, in person, 
discussion with them about the direction of the product and what you 
should/shouldn't do.
Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment to 
work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe Unisys is 
hiring.
Hope this helps.

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt 
mailto:tekkyto...@aol.com>> wrote:
**
Hi,

We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no 
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a "Hotfix."  
Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I believe it's 
more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was communiccated).  
As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be made - their position 
is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their application."  For example, if 
there are OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company wants the fields to 
be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This is what our company 
calls "a broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal 
developers are to administer the data and are not able to create a form, add a 
field, create an active link, filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only 
four filters were created over the two years from our team.  To make a code 
change, it requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new 
code, weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified, 
then go through the CAB review board,  etc

Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our company views the 
ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet requirements that 
continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh statemen

Customization

[Koyb P. Liabt]

**
 
That's a scary thought.  I hope they do not have this  point of view with 
any other application.  It's unfortunate because  BMC is a really good 
product, however our  Managers are sending out  this bad publicity due to a 
lack 
of understanding of the BMC  products.  When I try to explain - it's like 
talking to sheet  rock.  Nice people, but I'm not sure why they are not 
listening to the  professional recommendations the BMC SMEs that they  hire.  
Meanwhile we have all these great BMC tools and we are not  leveraging the 
technology. 
 
A year ago, I created 1 field in a regular table.  I  heard noise about it 
of course - my phone was ringing right away.  I  was told this new field 
made them really "nervous" and code changes are not  allowed - contact BMC for 
a hotfix instead.  I'm still trying to wrap my  mind around this.  I wish 
Doug would have a chat with  them.
 
 
From: Action Request  System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of arslist
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 4:35 PM
To:  arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Customization
 
 
**  
Does  your company have the same unrealistic view of all application 
software or  only BMC’s? 
Feels  like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of it. 
Dan 
From: Action Request  System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf  Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: October 18, 2013 11:06 AM
To:  _arslist@ARSLIST.ORG_ (mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG) 
Subject:  Re: Customization 
**  
** 
 
We  are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we 
have  overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code 
changes -  and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh  brother)
 

 
 
From:  Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On  Behalf Of Tauf Chowdhury
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41  AM
To: _arslist@ARSLIST.ORG_ (mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG) 
Subject:  Re: Customization
 
**  
 
What version are you on? In the newer  versions, BMC has made it "easier" 
to customize the system and every  version, they try to take more and more 
customer "customizations" and make  them something you can configure within 
the tool. So I guess the first  question is if you are on a version that 
supports overlays (7.6.04  +).  
 
It may then be a good idea to get in touch  with your company's sales guy 
and explain to him the negative opinion  everyone has about the product and 
said comments about the "no  customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person 
will be interested in  smoothing things over if he cares about doing more 
business. Ask him/her to  set up a meeting with product management and have a 
real, in person,  discussion with them about the direction of the product and 
what you  should/shouldn't do. 
 
Worst case scenario, hit the job market.  Sounds like a crappy environment 
to work in. There are plenty of great  opportunities out there. I believe 
Unisys is  hiring.
 
Hope this  helps.

 
 
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P.  Liabt <_Tekkytommy@aol.com_ 
(mailto:tekkyto...@aol.com) >  wrote: 
**  
 
 
Hi,
 

 
We  have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no  
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a  "Hotfix." 
 
Management states that BMC informed them "not to  customize."  (I believe 
it's more than an issue related to upgrades -  not sure what all was 
communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a  change that needs to be made - 
their 
position is.." it's BMC's  responsibility to fix their application."  For 
example, if there are  OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company wants 
the fields to  be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This 
is  what our company calls "a broken piece of code that needs a  hotfix."  
(how absurd).  Internal developers are to  administer the data and are not 
able to create a form, add a field, create  an active link, filter etc - it 
might "break Remedy  more."   Only four filters were created over the two  
years from our team.  To make a code change, it  requires several pages of an 
essay detailing why we need this new  code, weeks of meetings to discuss the 
filter, Sr. Management must be  notified, then go through the CAB review 
board,  etc 
 

 
Unfortunately,  because of this "no customize" delusion, our  company views 
the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does  not meet requirements 
that continually change as we mature as a  company.  Harsh statements are 
daily communicated throughout our  company over these issues.  Whenever a 
field and/or workflow does not  match their "wish list" - almost every meeting, 
people are walking  around complaining that the "tool just does not work."  
This is so f

Re: Customization

[John Sundberg]

Custom users are happy users.

-John


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Rod Harris  wrote:

> **
> Hi Koyb,
>
> I understand your frustration and I've seen similar edicts over the years.
> Like you I don't agree with them. Some observations
>
> It seems very easy for people to rush to blame any dissatisfaction with
> ITSM on the presence of any or too many "customizations".
> Remedy ITSM has always been intended as a customizable product. Early
> versions were little more than templates to get you started. Full source is
> provided and it is readable. This is a key strength and market
> differentiator for the product.
> Support from the vendor for customization has always been there and won't
> be going away any time soon. There will always be sophisticated and smart
> Remedy developers pushing the envelope to create new and innovative
> extensions to the base product. This will happen even as the base product
> continues to provide more and more features. There is no one size fits all
> in ITSM or virtually any other sphere.
>
> Rod
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 18 October 2013 21:32, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:
>
>> ** **
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no
>> customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a
>> "Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I
>> believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was
>> communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be
>> made - their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their
>> application."  For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional"
>> and our company wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on
>> BMC to fix it.  This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that
>> needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the
>> data and are not able to create a form, add a field, create an active link,
>> filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only four filters were created
>> over the two years from our team.  To make a code change, it
>> requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new code,
>> weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified,
>> then go through the CAB review board,  etc
>>
>> Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our
>> company views the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet
>> requirements that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh
>> statements are daily communicated throughout our company over these
>> issues.  Whenever a field and/or workflow does not match their "wish
>> list" - almost every meeting, people are walking around complaining that
>> the "tool just does not work."  This is so far from the truth! I have
>> explained many times the concept of "software development application" and
>> "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based on industry standard (and other
>> factors) that contains software development applications that supports IT
>> Service Management.  BMC cannot predict which fields you want to be
>> required in every single case.  Each company is different.  Yes,
>> standardize as much as possible, however if you need to modify the code to
>> fit your business requirement - then do so.
>>
>> I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC
>> communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is
>> stating BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we
>> should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming from?
>>
>> If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine"
>> on a form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality
>> is, we have a great need to create tables to manage data and for
>> integrations - however we cannot :(
>>
>> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>



-- 

*John Sundberg*
Kinetic Data, Inc.
"Your Business. Your Process."

Save the date!
*KEG14*
February 24-25, 2014
*For more information, click here * -
KEG<http://www.kineticdata.com/Events/KEG.html>

651-556-0930 I john.sundb...@kineticdata.com
www.kineticdata.com I community.kineticdata.com

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[Rod Harris]

Hi Koyb,

I understand your frustration and I've seen similar edicts over the years.
Like you I don't agree with them. Some observations

It seems very easy for people to rush to blame any dissatisfaction with
ITSM on the presence of any or too many "customizations".
Remedy ITSM has always been intended as a customizable product. Early
versions were little more than templates to get you started. Full source is
provided and it is readable. This is a key strength and market
differentiator for the product.
Support from the vendor for customization has always been there and won't
be going away any time soon. There will always be sophisticated and smart
Remedy developers pushing the envelope to create new and innovative
extensions to the base product. This will happen even as the base product
continues to provide more and more features. There is no one size fits all
in ITSM or virtually any other sphere.

Rod







On 18 October 2013 21:32, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:

> ** **
> Hi,
>
> We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no
> customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a
> "Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I
> believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was
> communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be
> made - their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their
> application."  For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional"
> and our company wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on
> BMC to fix it.  This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that
> needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the
> data and are not able to create a form, add a field, create an active link,
> filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only four filters were created
> over the two years from our team.  To make a code change, it
> requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new code,
> weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified,
> then go through the CAB review board,  etc
>
> Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our
> company views the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet
> requirements that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh
> statements are daily communicated throughout our company over these
> issues.  Whenever a field and/or workflow does not match their "wish
> list" - almost every meeting, people are walking around complaining that
> the "tool just does not work."  This is so far from the truth! I have
> explained many times the concept of "software development application" and
> "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based on industry standard (and other
> factors) that contains software development applications that supports IT
> Service Management.  BMC cannot predict which fields you want to be
> required in every single case.  Each company is different.  Yes,
> standardize as much as possible, however if you need to modify the code to
> fit your business requirement - then do so.
>
> I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC
> communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is
> stating BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we
> should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming from?
>
> If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine" on
> a form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality is,
> we have a great need to create tables to manage data and for integrations -
> however we cannot :(
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[arslist]

Does your company have the same unrealistic view of all application software
or only BMC's?

 

Feels like a Friday type thread, only a Dilbert version of it.

 

Dan

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: October 18, 2013 11:06 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Customization

 

** 

**

We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we have
overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code changes -
and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)

 

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tauf Chowdhury
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> 
Subject: Re: Customization

 

** 

What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" to
customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more
customer "customizations" and make them something you can configure within
the tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a version that
supports overlays (7.6.04 +). 

It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy and
explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and said
comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person will
be interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more
business. Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have a
real, in person, discussion with them about the direction of the product and
what you should/shouldn't do. 

Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment to
work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe Unisys
is hiring.

Hope this helps.

 

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt mailto:tekkyto...@aol.com> > wrote:

** 

Hi,

 

We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a
"Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I
believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was
communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be made
- their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their application."
For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company
wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.
This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."
(how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the data and are not
able to create a form, add a field, create an active link, filter etc - it
might "break Remedy more."   Only four filters were created over the two
years from our team.  To make a code change, it requires several pages of an
essay detailing why we need this new code, weeks of meetings to discuss the
filter, Sr. Management must be notified, then go through the CAB review
board,  etc 

 

Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our company views
the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet requirements
that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh statements are
daily communicated throughout our company over these issues.  Whenever a
field and/or workflow does not match their "wish list" - almost every
meeting, people are walking around complaining that the "tool just does not
work."  This is so far from the truth! I have explained many times the
concept of "software development application" and "developer."  BMC packaged
ITSM based on industry standard (and other factors) that contains software
development applications that supports IT Service Management.  BMC cannot
predict which fields you want to be required in every single case.  Each
company is different.  Yes, standardize as much as possible, however if you
need to modify the code to fit your business requirement - then do so.  

 

I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC
communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is
stating BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we
should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming from?

 

If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine" on a
form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality is, we
have a great need to create tables to manage data and for integrations -
however we cannot :(   

 

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_





 

-- 
Tauf Chowdhury

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ 

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

OT: Customization

[Jason Miller]

So now that I have thrown out there that my team (and a few others) are the
floodgate keeper closers...   Can anybody point me to or share (offline
even) a solid (ish) way to estimate effort levels?  We are still learning
and making the transition from all custom shop to ITSM shop and now more
than ever my team needs a way to estimate how much impact a change will
have on ITSM, sustaining that customization, as well as estimate how long
that change will take.  Likewise we have gone from our traditional two
environments (test/dev and prod) to 6 environments (the same two as before
and 4 ITSM environments) plus tacking on ADDM for fun.  These days my team
is dancing around BMC's code/design when customizing/evaluating RCFs as
well as doing it in many more places.  We have growing pains and would love
to learn from others instead of reinvent the wheel.  Admittedly over many
years our focus has been to keep up with the demand and not to take a look
at ourselves and improve our processes to this degree (being a custom shop
the need could be debated).

I would love for this type of thing to be readily available to all of us
but at this point I am pleading for any help public or private.  I know we
are not the only ones that have these issues and/or need (faster) growth in
this area.  The floodgates are getting heavy and I am not looking forward
to a swim :)

My ARSList brothers and sisters (is that going to far?) am I talking for
more than just my team?  I am not the first person to ask for this and
there have been discussions regarding "yeah we all should have something
like this" but that is as far as it has gone.  Of course there are
companies that keep money coming in by guarding this info/worksheets so I
am not expecting much from them.  As a community is there a need and enough
interest to actually put some effort in tackling this?  Understandably
there are variables and things will not be black and white but I am sure we
can come up with some guidelines.

Jason


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Jason Miller wrote:

> LOL!  I have been thinking we need a visit from Doug too (not just around
> customizing but also for CMDB expectations reality check).  In our org
> there are many of the same perceptions; that ITSM doesn't work how we
> want so it is broken.  Occasionally somebody suggest that BMC needs to
> "fix it".  However as an org we are not against customizations (it is
> actually our culture with almost all products).  It is a bit of the
> opposite where we are trying to keep the floodgates closed by making people
> prove there is real benefit to the change they want.  That the effort to
> make the change and to continue to support it is not more than the process
> effort the change actually reduces.  Since we have FTE developers and
> they don't work in for the requesting department all customization are
> free, right?
>
> It almost sounds like BMC Remedy ITSM is not for Koyb's organization.
>  How the environment is described I am not sure there is any product that
> is for your org but I believe Remedy is just too flexible
> customization-wise and inflexible BMC willing to change it for one
> customer wise (best of luck with the next vendor).
>
> So when something is deemed broken is there anything supporting that
> statement beyond "it isn't how *we* do business" or "because *we *don't
> like it"?  Something like "the ITSM CM process deviates from *ITIL *process
> when doing XYZ"?  "*Industry standards* are ABC and BMC ITSM is expecting
> us to do DEF"?
>
> Even referencing ITIL, Best Practices and Industry Standards will only
> get you so far and why BMC ITSM (Remedy) allows modifications to the
> framework provided. If they were ridged rules like you org seems to be
> looking for (as long as they agree to them) then no changes would be
> allowed.  In some cases these frameworks have gray area and BMC needs do
> some interpreting for them self and make some decisions.  So yes there are
> places where arguments could be made that the tool doesn't do what one's
> interpretation of what "should" be done.  In those cases you change it *IF
> * the business gain/impact is great enough.
>
> I can only imaging if BMC made custom builds per customer's
> interpretation of how things should work.  They would need to greatly
> increase their staffing levels to develop and support all of the
> variations.  It just isn't sustainable.  Much like why almost any
> organization standardizes on set models of Dell, HP, etc. for desktops.
>  Can you imagine if each department went to Best Buy and just bought want
> they wanted?  It isn't sustainable.
>
> So now that we know BMC isn't going to make special builds for customers
> (well I guess money talks

Re: Customization

[Susan Palmer]

That's why we're a 'custom' shop.  Our company is quite unique and has a
vision and requirements that don't exactly fit the mold.  Plus our business
grows quickly and adds new requirements that ITSM may not be able to
support OOB.  We have our own equivalent of ITSM, just our version.

Koyb might consider suggesting Cloud Remedy where they also manage it.  You
can request customizations and bmc will do them for you.  Be prepared to
have deep pockets!  Then you have OOB ITSM sort-of, but bmc is doing it so
it looks like they've changed the basic program.  And they'll handle the
future upgrades!

Susan


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Jason Miller wrote:

> **
> LOL!  I have been thinking we need a visit from Doug too (not just around
> customizing but also for CMDB expectations reality check).  In our org
> there are many of the same perceptions; that ITSM doesn't work how we
> want so it is broken.  Occasionally somebody suggest that BMC needs to
> "fix it".  However as an org we are not against customizations (it is
> actually our culture with almost all products).  It is a bit of the
> opposite where we are trying to keep the floodgates closed by making people
> prove there is real benefit to the change they want.  That the effort to
> make the change and to continue to support it is not more than the process
> effort the change actually reduces.  Since we have FTE developers and
> they don't work in for the requesting department all customization are
> free, right?
>
> It almost sounds like BMC Remedy ITSM is not for Koyb's organization.
>  How the environment is described I am not sure there is any product that
> is for your org but I believe Remedy is just too flexible
> customization-wise and inflexible BMC willing to change it for one
> customer wise (best of luck with the next vendor).
>
> So when something is deemed broken is there anything supporting that
> statement beyond "it isn't how *we* do business" or "because *we *don't
> like it"?  Something like "the ITSM CM process deviates from *ITIL *process
> when doing XYZ"?  "*Industry standards* are ABC and BMC ITSM is expecting
> us to do DEF"?
>
> Even referencing ITIL, Best Practices and Industry Standards will only
> get you so far and why BMC ITSM (Remedy) allows modifications to the
> framework provided. If they were ridged rules like you org seems to be
> looking for (as long as they agree to them) then no changes would be
> allowed.  In some cases these frameworks have gray area and BMC needs do
> some interpreting for them self and make some decisions.  So yes there are
> places where arguments could be made that the tool doesn't do what one's
> interpretation of what "should" be done.  In those cases you change it *IF
> * the business gain/impact is great enough.
>
> I can only imaging if BMC made custom builds per customer's
> interpretation of how things should work.  They would need to greatly
> increase their staffing levels to develop and support all of the
> variations.  It just isn't sustainable.  Much like why almost any
> organization standardizes on set models of Dell, HP, etc. for desktops.
>  Can you imagine if each department went to Best Buy and just bought want
> they wanted?  It isn't sustainable.
>
> So now that we know BMC isn't going to make special builds for customers
> (well I guess money talks and that there might always be exceptions if
> enough zeros are included (hopefully this is less of a factor now that they
> are private)).  So let's say BMC "fixes" what your org does not like.
>  What if my org agrees with how the functionality originally worked?  Why
> does your org get to decide the product path?
>
> Then there is the poor soul who moves between companies in the IT world
> and needs to learn each company's version of ITSM.  Of course there are
> wide variations between version and vendors but when somebody has worked
> with one of BMC's ITSM 7.6.04 / 8.0 / 8.1 that experience should be
> fairly transferable.
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Susan Palmer wrote:
>
>> **
>> Invite your management and Doug Mueller to have a discussion together.
>> If Doug cannot reassure them it can be done, no one can.
>>
>> Susan
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Pierson, Shawn <
>> shawn.pier...@energytransfer.com> wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> I agree with the suggestion from Tauf.  It sounds to me like Remedy is
>>> being set up to fail in your organization, and you can extrapolate whether
>>> that impacts your job or not.  If you ot

Re: Customization

[Jason Miller]

LOL!  I have been thinking we need a visit from Doug too (not just around
customizing but also for CMDB expectations reality check).  In our org
there are many of the same perceptions; that ITSM doesn't work how we want
so it is broken.  Occasionally somebody suggest that BMC needs to "fix it".
 However as an org we are not against customizations (it is actually our
culture with almost all products).  It is a bit of the opposite where we
are trying to keep the floodgates closed by making people prove there is
real benefit to the change they want.  That the effort to make the change
and to continue to support it is not more than the process effort the
change actually reduces.  Since we have FTE developers and they don't work
in for the requesting department all customization are free, right?

It almost sounds like BMC Remedy ITSM is not for Koyb's organization.  How
the environment is described I am not sure there is any product that is for
your org but I believe Remedy is just too flexible customization-wise and
inflexible BMC willing to change it for one customer wise (best of luck
with the next vendor).

So when something is deemed broken is there anything supporting that
statement beyond "it isn't how *we* do business" or "because *we *don't
like it"?  Something like "the ITSM CM process deviates from *ITIL *process
when doing XYZ"?  "*Industry standards* are ABC and BMC ITSM is expecting
us to do DEF"?

Even referencing ITIL, Best Practices and Industry Standards will only get
you so far and why BMC ITSM (Remedy) allows modifications to the framework
provided. If they were ridged rules like you org seems to be looking for
(as long as they agree to them) then no changes would be allowed.  In some
cases these frameworks have gray area and BMC needs do some interpreting
for them self and make some decisions.  So yes there are places where
arguments could be made that the tool doesn't do what one's interpretation
of what "should" be done.  In those cases you change it *IF* the business
gain/impact is great enough.

I can only imaging if BMC made custom builds per customer's interpretation
of how things should work.  They would need to greatly increase their
staffing levels to develop and support all of the variations.  It just
isn't sustainable.  Much like why almost any organization standardizes on
set models of Dell, HP, etc. for desktops.  Can you imagine if each
department went to Best Buy and just bought want they wanted?  It isn't
sustainable.

So now that we know BMC isn't going to make special builds for customers
(well I guess money talks and that there might always be exceptions if
enough zeros are included (hopefully this is less of a factor now that they
are private)).  So let's say BMC "fixes" what your org does not like.  What
if my org agrees with how the functionality originally worked?  Why does
your org get to decide the product path?

Then there is the poor soul who moves between companies in the IT world and
needs to learn each company's version of ITSM.  Of course there are wide
variations between version and vendors but when somebody has worked with
one of BMC's ITSM 7.6.04 / 8.0 / 8.1 that experience should be fairly
transferable.

Jason


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Susan Palmer  wrote:

> **
> Invite your management and Doug Mueller to have a discussion together.  If
> Doug cannot reassure them it can be done, no one can.
>
> Susan
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Pierson, Shawn <
> shawn.pier...@energytransfer.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>> I agree with the suggestion from Tauf.  It sounds to me like Remedy is
>> being set up to fail in your organization, and you can extrapolate whether
>> that impacts your job or not.  If you otherwise like your company, see if
>> you can find someone logical in the circle of decision makers, schedule an
>> hour to talk to them about overlays, BMC’s best practices, etc. and
>> convince them to become your champion.  There’s no way to override or
>> change the minds of people higher than you who don’t trust in your
>> knowledge and expertise.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> One of the primary reasons I’ve stuck with the company I work for now is
>> that I can have discussions with I.T. management and while we may not
>> always agree, they defer technical decisions to the people that actually
>> understand the technology.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *Shawn Pierson *
>>
>> Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
>> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Koyb P. Liabt

Re: Customization

[Susan Palmer]

Invite your management and Doug Mueller to have a discussion together.  If
Doug cannot reassure them it can be done, no one can.

Susan


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Pierson, Shawn <
shawn.pier...@energytransfer.com> wrote:

> **
>
> I agree with the suggestion from Tauf.  It sounds to me like Remedy is
> being set up to fail in your organization, and you can extrapolate whether
> that impacts your job or not.  If you otherwise like your company, see if
> you can find someone logical in the circle of decision makers, schedule an
> hour to talk to them about overlays, BMC’s best practices, etc. and
> convince them to become your champion.  There’s no way to override or
> change the minds of people higher than you who don’t trust in your
> knowledge and expertise.
>
> ** **
>
> One of the primary reasons I’ve stuck with the company I work for now is
> that I can have discussions with I.T. management and while we may not
> always agree, they defer technical decisions to the people that actually
> understand the technology.
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,
>
> * *
>
> *Shawn Pierson *
>
> Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Koyb P. Liabt
> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 10:06 AM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>
> ** **
>
> ** 
>
> **
>
> We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we
> have overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code
> changes - and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)
>
>  
>
>  ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [
> mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On Behalf Of *Tauf
> Chowdhury
> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41 AM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: Customization
>
> ** **
>
> ** 
>
> What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier"
> to customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more
> customer "customizations" and make them something you can configure within
> the tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a version that
> supports overlays (7.6.04 +). 
>
> It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy
> and explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and
> said comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person
> will be interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more
> business. Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have
> a real, in person, discussion with them about the direction of the product
> and what you should/shouldn't do. 
>
> Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment
> to work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe
> Unisys is hiring.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:
> 
>
> ** 
>
> Hi,
>
>  
>
> We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no
> customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a
> "Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I
> believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was
> communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be
> made - their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their
> application."  For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional"
> and our company wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on
> BMC to fix it.  This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that
> needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the
> data and are not able to create a form, add a field, create an active link,
> filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only four filters were created
> over the two years from our team.  To make a code change, it
> requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new code,
> weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified,
> then go through the CAB review board,  etc 
>
>  
>
> Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our
> company views the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet
> requirements that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh
> statements are da

Re: Customization

[Pierson, Shawn]

I agree with the suggestion from Tauf.  It sounds to me like Remedy is being 
set up to fail in your organization, and you can extrapolate whether that 
impacts your job or not.  If you otherwise like your company, see if you can 
find someone logical in the circle of decision makers, schedule an hour to talk 
to them about overlays, BMC's best practices, etc. and convince them to become 
your champion.  There's no way to override or change the minds of people higher 
than you who don't trust in your knowledge and expertise.

One of the primary reasons I've stuck with the company I work for now is that I 
can have discussions with I.T. management and while we may not always agree, 
they defer technical decisions to the people that actually understand the 
technology.

Thanks,

Shawn Pierson
Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Koyb P. Liabt
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 10:06 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Customization

**
**
We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that we have 
overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code changes - and 
BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tauf Chowdhury
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: Customization

**
What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" to 
customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more customer 
"customizations" and make them something you can configure within the tool. So 
I guess the first question is if you are on a version that supports overlays 
(7.6.04 +).
It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy and 
explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and said 
comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person will be 
interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more business. Ask 
him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have a real, in person, 
discussion with them about the direction of the product and what you 
should/shouldn't do.
Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment to 
work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe Unisys is 
hiring.
Hope this helps.

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt 
mailto:tekkyto...@aol.com>> wrote:
**
Hi,

We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no 
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a "Hotfix."  
Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I believe it's 
more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was communiccated).  
As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be made - their position 
is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their application."  For example, if 
there are OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company wants the fields to 
be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This is what our company 
calls "a broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal 
developers are to administer the data and are not able to create a form, add a 
field, create an active link, filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only 
four filters were created over the two years from our team.  To make a code 
change, it requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new 
code, weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified, 
then go through the CAB review board,  etc

Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our company views the 
ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet requirements that 
continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh statements are daily 
communicated throughout our company over these issues.  Whenever a field and/or 
workflow does not match their "wish list" - almost every meeting, people are 
walking around complaining that the "tool just does not work."  This is so far 
from the truth! I have explained many times the concept of "software 
development application" and "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based on industry 
standard (and other factors) that contains software development applications 
that supports IT Service Management.  BMC cannot predict which fields you want 
to be required in every single case.  Each company is different.  Yes, 
standardize as much as possible, however if you need to modify the code to fit 
your business requirement - then do so.

I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is B

Re: Customization

[Koyb P. Liabt]

**
We are on AR System/ITSM 7.6.4 and I have explained to the team that  we 
have overlays which manages these code changes. The reply was "No code  
changes - and BMC has to fix their application."  (oh brother)
 
 
 
From: Action Request  System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of  Tauf Chowdhury
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:41  AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re:  Customization
 
**  
 
What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has  made it "easier" 
to customize the system and every version, they try to take  more and more 
customer "customizations" and make them something you can  configure within 
the tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a  version that 
supports overlays (7.6.04 +).  
 
It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your  company's sales guy 
and explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about  the product and 
said comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the  sales person 
will be interested in smoothing things over if he cares about  doing more 
business. Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management  and have a 
real, in person, discussion with them about the direction of the  product and 
what you should/shouldn't do. 
 
Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a  crappy environment 
to work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out  there. I believe 
Unisys is hiring.
 
Hope this helps.

 
 
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt <_Tekkytommy@aol.com_ 
(mailto:tekkyto...@aol.com) > wrote: 
**  
 
 
Hi,
 

 
We  have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no  
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a  "Hotfix." 
 
Management states that BMC informed them "not to  customize."  (I believe 
it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not  sure what all was 
communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change  that needs to be made - 
their 
position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix  their application."  For 
example, if there are OOB fields marked as  'optional" and our company wants 
the fields to be "required" - then the  oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This 
is what our company calls "a  broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."  
(how absurd).  Internal  developers are to administer the data and are not able 
to create a form,  add a field, create an active link, filter etc - it 
might "break Remedy  more."   Only four filters were created over the two years 
 
from our team.  To make a code change, it requires several  pages of an 
essay detailing why we need this new code, weeks of meetings  to discuss the 
filter, Sr. Management must be notified, then go through  the CAB review 
board,  etc 
 

 
Unfortunately,  because of this "no customize" delusion, our company views 
the  ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet requirements 
that  continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh statements are 
daily  communicated throughout our company over these issues.  Whenever a field 
 and/or workflow does not match their "wish list" - almost every meeting,  
people are walking around complaining that the "tool just does not  work."  
This is so far from the truth! I have explained many times  the concept of 
"software development application" and  "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based 
on industry standard (and  other factors) that contains software 
development applications that supports  IT Service Management.  BMC cannot 
predict 
which fields you want to  be required in every single case.  Each company is 
different.  Yes,  standardize as much as possible, however if you need to 
modify the code to fit  your business requirement - then do so.  
 

 
I  spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC  
communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is 
stating  BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we  
should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming  from?
 

 
If I  needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine" on 
a  form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality  is, 
we have a great need to create tables to manage data and for integrations  
- however we cannot :(   
 


_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20  years_




-- 
Tauf  Chowdhury
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20  years_ 


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[tboot...@objectpath.com]

**
You could argue that part of your "competive advantage" over your competition are your internal processes and tools.  If you are using the same processes and tools as others, how can you differentiate yourself from a competitive standpoint ? (I'm not sure what your business does or what services you provide, but this may or may not be applicable). 
 
Some very applicable "customizations" (implemented as overlays) could give your company and staff a competitive advantage over other companies, either through service offerings or through internal cost savings.    You might want to try this approach to validate customizing the tool, when appropriate.
 
Terry
 
 
 
on Oct 18, 2013, Tauf Chowdhury  wrote:
**
What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" to customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more customer "customizations" and make them something you can configure within the tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a version that supports overlays (7.6.04 +). 
It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy and explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and said comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person will be interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more business. Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have a real, in person, discussion with them about the direction of the product and what you should/shouldn't do. 
Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment to work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe Unisys is hiring.
Hope this helps.


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt <tekkyto...@aol.com> wrote:
** 

Hi,
 
We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a "Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be made - their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their application."  For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the data and are not able to create a form, add a field, create an active link, filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only four filters were created over the two years from our team.  To make a code change, it requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new code, weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified, then go through the CAB review board,  etc 
 
Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our company views the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet requirements that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh statements are daily communicated throughout our company over these issues.  Whenever a field and/or workflow does not match their "wish list" - almost every meeting, people are walking around complaining that the "tool just does not work."  This is so far from the truth! I have explained many times the concept of "software development application" and "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based on industry standard (and other factors) that contains software development applications that supports IT Service Management.  BMC cannot predict which fields you want to be required in every single case.  Each company is different.  Yes, standardize as much as possible, however if you need to modify the code to fit your business requirement - then do so. 
 
I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is stating BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming from?
 
If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine" on a form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality is, we have a great need to create tables to manage data and for integrations - however we cannot :(   
 

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_


 
-- Tauf Chowdhury
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ 

 
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

Re: Customization

[Roger Justice]

The comment you state that Support provided is the starting point. Doug Mueller 
has made the same statement during presentations at WWRUG. The difference is 
that Doug will then add that if a customization is required to meet a specific 
need and there is no way to do it OOB then do the customization using Overlays 
and document and test extensively. Prior to a new upgrade being applied the 
customization needs to be reviewed to determine if it is still needed. 

I would anticipate that most members of the ARSList will provide the same 
answer concerning BMC Remedy applications, minimize customizations and insure 
that their is proper justification.


-Original Message-
From: Koyb P. Liabt 
To: arslist 
Sent: Fri, Oct 18, 2013 9:32 am
Subject: Customization


**
Hi,
 
We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no 
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a "Hotfix."  
Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I believe it's 
more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was communiccated).  
As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be made - their position 
is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their application."  For example, if 
there are OOB fields marked as 'optional" and our company wants the fields to 
be "required" - then the oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This is what our company 
calls "a broken piece of code that needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal 
developers are to administer the data and are not able to create a form, add a 
field, create an active link, filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only 
four filters were created over the two years from our team.  To make a code 
change, it requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new 
code, weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified, 
then go through the CAB review board,  etc 
 
Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our company views the 
ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet requirements that 
continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh statements are daily 
communicated throughout our company over these issues.  Whenever a field and/or 
workflow does not match their "wish list" - almost every meeting, people are 
walking around complaining that the "tool just does not work."  This is so far 
from the truth! I have explained many times the concept of "software 
development application" and "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based on industry 
standard (and other factors) that contains software development applications 
that supports IT Service Management.  BMC cannot predict which fields you want 
to be required in every single case.  Each company is different.  Yes, 
standardize as much as possible, however if you need to modify the code to fit 
your business requirement - then do so.  
 
I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC 
communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is stating 
BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we should not 
customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming from?
 
If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine" on a 
form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality is, we have 
a great need to create tables to manage data and for integrations - however we 
cannot :(   
 
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization

[Tauf Chowdhury]

What version are you on? In the newer versions, BMC has made it "easier" to
customize the system and every version, they try to take more and more
customer "customizations" and make them something you can configure within
the tool. So I guess the first question is if you are on a version that
supports overlays (7.6.04 +).
It may then be a good idea to get in touch with your company's sales guy
and explain to him the negative opinion everyone has about the product and
said comments about the "no customization" rule. I'm sure the sales person
will be interested in smoothing things over if he cares about doing more
business. Ask him/her to set up a meeting with product management and have
a real, in person, discussion with them about the direction of the product
and what you should/shouldn't do.
Worst case scenario, hit the job market. Sounds like a crappy environment
to work in. There are plenty of great opportunities out there. I believe
Unisys is hiring.
Hope this helps.


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Koyb P. Liabt  wrote:

> ** **
> Hi,
>
> We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that no
> customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a
> "Hotfix."  Management states that BMC informed them "not to customize."  (I
> believe it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not sure what all was
> communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change that needs to be
> made - their position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix their
> application."  For example, if there are OOB fields marked as 'optional"
> and our company wants the fields to be "required" - then the oweness is on
> BMC to fix it.  This is what our company calls "a broken piece of code that
> needs a hotfix."  (how absurd).  Internal developers are to administer the
> data and are not able to create a form, add a field, create an active link,
> filter etc - it might "break Remedy more."   Only four filters were created
> over the two years from our team.  To make a code change, it
> requires several pages of an essay detailing why we need this new code,
> weeks of meetings to discuss the filter, Sr. Management must be notified,
> then go through the CAB review board,  etc
>
> Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our
> company views the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not meet
> requirements that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh
> statements are daily communicated throughout our company over these
> issues.  Whenever a field and/or workflow does not match their "wish
> list" - almost every meeting, people are walking around complaining that
> the "tool just does not work."  This is so far from the truth! I have
> explained many times the concept of "software development application" and
> "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based on industry standard (and other
> factors) that contains software development applications that supports IT
> Service Management.  BMC cannot predict which fields you want to be
> required in every single case.  Each company is different.  Yes,
> standardize as much as possible, however if you need to modify the code to
> fit your business requirement - then do so.
>
> I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is BMC
> communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is
> stating BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we
> should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming from?
>
> If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word "nine" on
> a form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.  The reality is,
> we have a great need to create tables to manage data and for integrations -
> however we cannot :(
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_




-- 
*Tauf Chowdhury

*

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Customization

[Koyb P. Liabt]

Hi,
 
We have a serious issue.  Our company has strictly mandated that  no 
customizations be made to our ITSM system - unless BMC does it via a  "Hotfix." 
 
Management states that BMC informed them "not to  customize."  (I believe 
it's more than an issue related to upgrades - not  sure what all was 
communiccated).  As result, whenever there is a change  that needs to be made - 
their 
position is.." it's BMC's responsibility to fix  their application."  For 
example, if there are OOB fields marked as  'optional" and our company wants 
the fields to be "required" - then the  oweness is on BMC to fix it.  This is 
what our company calls "a broken  piece of code that needs a hotfix."  (how 
absurd).  Internal  developers are to administer the data and are not able 
to create a form,  add a field, create an active link, filter etc - it might 
"break Remedy  more."   Only four filters were created over the two years  
from our team.  To make a code change, it requires several pages  of an 
essay detailing why we need this new code, weeks of meetings to  discuss the 
filter, Sr. Management must be notified, then go through the  CAB review board, 
 etc 
 
Unfortunately, because of this "no customize" delusion, our  company views 
the ITSM OOB applications as "junk" because it does not  meet requirements 
that continually change as we mature as a company.  Harsh  statements are 
daily communicated throughout our company over these  issues.  Whenever a field 
and/or workflow does not match their "wish  list" - almost every meeting, 
people are walking around complaining that  the "tool just does not work."  
This is so far from the truth! I have  explained many times the concept of 
"software development application" and  "developer."  BMC packaged ITSM based 
on industry standard (and other  factors) that contains software development 
applications that supports IT  Service Management.  BMC cannot predict 
which fields you want to be  required in every single case.  Each company is 
different.  Yes,  standardize as much as possible, however if you need to 
modify the code to fit  your business requirement - then do so.  
 
I spoke with BMC technical support and asked the technician what is  BMC 
communicating regarding customizations - because our Sr. Management is  
stating BMC warned them not to customize.  The BMC tech informed me that we  
should not customize ITSM. ??  Where on earth is this coming  from?
 
If I needed to change the field from a numerical "9" to the word  "nine" on 
a form - the decision makers on our team would flip out.   The reality is, 
we have a great need to create tables to manage data and for  integrations - 
however we cannot :(   

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
 

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Wcandro Roy]

Hi Misi,

Thanks a lot for the information. It gives much needed clarity on the
Overlay/Customization part  during my upgrade.

I'll be doing a in-place upgrade and all my objects in 7.6.04 are in Base
Mode (Un-Modified).

So, for now i'am not converting them to Customization or Overlay for
Upgrade to 8.1 and would be doing all the future development in the Base
Development only.

(On the safer side i'll keep a backup of the form User and Group with
related workflow during upgrade)



Jason - I have read the entire thread on "Using BPCU while ARS Upgrade" and
the information provided in that thread is just awesome. Thanks for sharing
such a detailed clarification on the usage or Overlay/Custom objects. I
think lot's of ARSList user would get benefited out of it.(I've saved a
copy for future reference :) )

As stated above, for now i'll stick to Base Mode, however in future i'am
planning to convert my Core custom objects to Overlay and Custom type.

Regards,
Andro WC



On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Jason Miller wrote:

> **
> Hi Andro,
>
> Did you see the thread "Using BPCU while ARS Upgrade" from August?  There
> was considerable discussion about upgrading custom environments, overlays,
> etc and not so much related to the zero downtime aspect.
>
> In short I think you are in a pretty good situation since your system is
> already on 7.6.04 and 8.1 as Misi stated is very similar.  You can choose
> to not use overlay/custom objects and maintain your customizations to BMC
> supplied definitions the same way it has been done for years.  At least for
> now.  There is the possibility that BMC might update later versions to more
> strictly enforce Best Practice mode.
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Andro WC  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for all your replies.
>>
>> I don't have ITSM on my ARS 7.6.04. I have my custom application on the
>> ARS and also would like to tell that my customization touches the User and
>> Group OOTB forms (some extra fields added, no workflow on the existing
>> fields).
>>
>> So, i'am looking for a plan to upgrade it from 7.6.04 to 8.1. I would
>> need your suggestion on the below lines
>>
>> 1) Do i need to convert all my custom workflow (including USer and Group
>> form customization) to Overlays before going to 8.1?
>>
>> 2) I have old remedy API integration (7.0.1) with the ARS, do i need to
>> update the API's as well?
>>
>> 3) For Macros i understand i would  need to create workflow in remedy. I
>> would like to if there are any other dependencies like these for upgrade to
>> 8.1?
>>
>> 4) If we go with the Overlay option then we would be creating overlays on
>> a Dev box on 7.6.04 and upgrade to 8.1,on Production box will migrate the
>> overlay created on 7.6.04 in Dev and then perform an upgrade (where we
>> would need some downtime i believe). Is this plan look fine or it's better
>> to upgrade first and then create overlay with Developer Studio 8.1 which is
>> more stable.
>>
>> Please help.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andro WC
>>
>>
>> ___
>> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
>> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>>
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Jason Miller]

Hi Andro,

Did you see the thread "Using BPCU while ARS Upgrade" from August?  There
was considerable discussion about upgrading custom environments, overlays,
etc and not so much related to the zero downtime aspect.

In short I think you are in a pretty good situation since your system is
already on 7.6.04 and 8.1 as Misi stated is very similar.  You can choose
to not use overlay/custom objects and maintain your customizations to BMC
supplied definitions the same way it has been done for years.  At least for
now.  There is the possibility that BMC might update later versions to more
strictly enforce Best Practice mode.

Jason


On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Andro WC  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks for all your replies.
>
> I don't have ITSM on my ARS 7.6.04. I have my custom application on the
> ARS and also would like to tell that my customization touches the User and
> Group OOTB forms (some extra fields added, no workflow on the existing
> fields).
>
> So, i'am looking for a plan to upgrade it from 7.6.04 to 8.1. I would need
> your suggestion on the below lines
>
> 1) Do i need to convert all my custom workflow (including USer and Group
> form customization) to Overlays before going to 8.1?
>
> 2) I have old remedy API integration (7.0.1) with the ARS, do i need to
> update the API's as well?
>
> 3) For Macros i understand i would  need to create workflow in remedy. I
> would like to if there are any other dependencies like these for upgrade to
> 8.1?
>
> 4) If we go with the Overlay option then we would be creating overlays on
> a Dev box on 7.6.04 and upgrade to 8.1,on Production box will migrate the
> overlay created on 7.6.04 in Dev and then perform an upgrade (where we
> would need some downtime i believe). Is this plan look fine or it's better
> to upgrade first and then create overlay with Developer Studio 8.1 which is
> more stable.
>
> Please help.
>
> Regards,
> Andro WC
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

7.6.04 and 8.1 is very similar, except that you are dropping ARUser.exe.

You should be able to connect a 8.1 Mid-Tier to your current server and test
your solution and see what is missing.

You seem to know exactly which fields you have added to User/Group, which is
good. I am not 100% sure, but I think the fields will be left intact by the
upgrade and you might get a copy of you old view with a new name.

If this is your only customizations, I suggest that you leave everything in
base mode. It is not an option to make OVERLAYs of these only, you need to
make all you other stuff CUSTOM. Otherwise your own workflow will not be able
to see the OVERLAY-stuff in User/Group.

Do you plan to install a new server and then migrate the data, or will you be
doing an in place upgrade?

Your API-stuff will probably work fine. It is not hard to recompile it though,
as the API has stayed more or less the same.

The old ARAdmin-tool had functionality to convert Macros to ACTL:s. I am not
sure in what version this vanished. You might look into using that to
automatically convert your Macros.

If you have a def-file, it is easy to find all objects with macros. It can be
a little difficult to figure out what the Macros does though.

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se

> Hi,
>
> Thanks for all your replies.
>
> I don't have ITSM on my ARS 7.6.04. I have my custom application on the ARS
> and also would like to tell that my customization touches the User and Group
> OOTB forms (some extra fields added, no workflow on the existing fields).
>
> So, i'am looking for a plan to upgrade it from 7.6.04 to 8.1. I would need
> your suggestion on the below lines
>
> 1) Do i need to convert all my custom workflow (including USer and Group form
> customization) to Overlays before going to 8.1?
>
> 2) I have old remedy API integration (7.0.1) with the ARS, do i need to update
> the API's as well?
>
> 3) For Macros i understand i would  need to create workflow in remedy. I would
> like to if there are any other dependencies like these for upgrade to 8.1?
>
> 4) If we go with the Overlay option then we would be creating overlays on a
> Dev box on 7.6.04 and upgrade to 8.1,on Production box will migrate the
> overlay created on 7.6.04 in Dev and then perform an upgrade (where we would
> need some downtime i believe). Is this plan look fine or it's better to
> upgrade first and then create overlay with Developer Studio 8.1 which is more
> stable.
>
> Please help.
>
> Regards,
> Andro WC
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Andro WC]

Hi,

Thanks for all your replies.

I don't have ITSM on my ARS 7.6.04. I have my custom application on the ARS and 
also would like to tell that my customization touches the User and Group OOTB 
forms (some extra fields added, no workflow on the existing fields).

So, i'am looking for a plan to upgrade it from 7.6.04 to 8.1. I would need your 
suggestion on the below lines

1) Do i need to convert all my custom workflow (including USer and Group form 
customization) to Overlays before going to 8.1?

2) I have old remedy API integration (7.0.1) with the ARS, do i need to update 
the API's as well?

3) For Macros i understand i would  need to create workflow in remedy. I would 
like to if there are any other dependencies like these for upgrade to 8.1?

4) If we go with the Overlay option then we would be creating overlays on a Dev 
box on 7.6.04 and upgrade to 8.1,on Production box will migrate the overlay 
created on 7.6.04 in Dev and then perform an upgrade (where we would need some 
downtime i believe). Is this plan look fine or it's better to upgrade first and 
then create overlay with Developer Studio 8.1 which is more stable.

Please help.

Regards,
Andro WC

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

You need two databases or database instances for the process I am talking about.

You would then do Delta Data Migrations to the new machine until you are ready
to switch over. Probably using RRR|Chive to do the Delta Data Migrations.

 Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se

> If the old and new systems that you're going to run in parallel access the
> same database
> doesn't that pose a problem?
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:38 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization
>
> Hi,
>
> Are we talking ITSM or not?
>
> Client side integration is very different than doing it to/from aruser.exe.
> Please explain what you have to get suggestions.
>
> Macros are typically various searches that can be converted to
> form-defined-searches. Other things on newer systems could be various reports
> and data exports.
>
> You can do an upgrade with almost zero downtime if you can run the old and new
> systems parallel.
>
> Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
>
> Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
> * 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.
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'am planning to upgrade my ARS7.6.04 to 8.1ARS. My current ARS has
>> large amount of customization and do not intend create overlays for them.
>>
>> Need your help to understand what all areas i need to take care of for
>> this upgrade (My server's are in server group with email integration
>> and i have other integration as well like WS/API and DB integration ),
>> like
>>
>> 1. WUT Macros would not work and needs to be converted to workflow.
>> 2. Any custom workflow written over the core BMC field may get lost
>> during upgrade.
>> 3. Any custom script solution on UserTool would not work over Mid-Tier.
>>
>> If anybody has attempted this before please let me know the challenges
>> faced.
>>
>> Note: I've seen a previous post related to this upgrade, however it
>> was more on upgrade with zero downtime line, which is currently not
>> available with the product version.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andro WC
>>
>> __
>> _ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
>> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers
> Are, and have been for 20 years"
>
> Portions of this message may be confidential under an exemption to Ohio's
> public records law or under a legal privilege. If you have received this
> message in error or due to an unauthorized transmission or interception,
> please delete all copies from your system without disclosing, copying, or
> transmitting this message.
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[richard....@bwc.state.oh.us]

If the old and new systems that you're going to run in parallel access the same 
database
doesn't that pose a problem?


-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:38 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

Hi,

Are we talking ITSM or not?

Client side integration is very different than doing it to/from aruser.exe.
Please explain what you have to get suggestions.

Macros are typically various searches that can be converted to 
form-defined-searches. Other things on newer systems could be various reports 
and data exports.

You can do an upgrade with almost zero downtime if you can run the old and new 
systems parallel.

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)

Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
* 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.

> Hi,
>
> I'am planning to upgrade my ARS7.6.04 to 8.1ARS. My current ARS has
> large amount of customization and do not intend create overlays for them.
>
> Need your help to understand what all areas i need to take care of for
> this upgrade (My server's are in server group with email integration
> and i have other integration as well like WS/API and DB integration ),
> like
>
> 1. WUT Macros would not work and needs to be converted to workflow.
> 2. Any custom workflow written over the core BMC field may get lost
> during upgrade.
> 3. Any custom script solution on UserTool would not work over Mid-Tier.
>
> If anybody has attempted this before please let me know the challenges faced.
>
> Note: I've seen a previous post related to this upgrade, however it
> was more on upgrade with zero downtime line, which is currently not
> available with the product version.
>
> Regards,
> Andro WC
>
> __
> _ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers 
Are, and have been for 20 years"

Portions of this message may be confidential under an exemption to Ohio's 
public records law or under a legal privilege. If you have received this 
message in error or due to an unauthorized transmission or interception, please 
delete all copies from your system without disclosing, copying, or transmitting 
this message.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

Are we talking ITSM or not?

Client side integration is very different than doing it to/from aruser.exe.
Please explain what you have to get suggestions.

Macros are typically various searches that can be converted to
form-defined-searches. Other things on newer systems could be various reports
and data exports.

You can do an upgrade with almost zero downtime if you can run the old and new
systems parallel.

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)

Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
* 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.

> Hi,
>
> I'am planning to upgrade my ARS7.6.04 to 8.1ARS. My current ARS has large
> amount of customization and do not intend create overlays for them.
>
> Need your help to understand what all areas i need to take care of for this
> upgrade (My server's are in server group with email integration and i have
> other integration as well like WS/API and DB integration ), like
>
> 1. WUT Macros would not work and needs to be converted to workflow.
> 2. Any custom workflow written over the core BMC field may get lost during
> upgrade.
> 3. Any custom script solution on UserTool would not work over Mid-Tier.
>
> If anybody has attempted this before please let me know the challenges faced.
>
> Note: I've seen a previous post related to this upgrade, however it was more
> on upgrade with zero downtime line, which is currently not available with the
> product version.
>
> Regards,
> Andro WC
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

ARS upgrade from 7.6.04 to 8.1 with Customization

[Andro WC]

Hi,

I'am planning to upgrade my ARS7.6.04 to 8.1ARS. My current ARS has large 
amount of customization and do not intend create overlays for them.

Need your help to understand what all areas i need to take care of for this 
upgrade (My server's are in server group with email integration and i have 
other integration as well like WS/API and DB integration ), like

1. WUT Macros would not work and needs to be converted to workflow.
2. Any custom workflow written over the core BMC field may get lost during 
upgrade.
3. Any custom script solution on UserTool would not work over Mid-Tier.

If anybody has attempted this before please let me know the challenges faced.

Note: I've seen a previous post related to this upgrade, however it was more on 
upgrade with zero downtime line, which is currently not available with the 
product version.

Regards,
Andro WC

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization - Dynamic Notifications based on Product Categorization Table Loop and Notify issue.

[Barbour, Brandi D]

:) Thank You Fred... You are correct.  I knew I was having a blonde moment.
Thanks again,
Brandi

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:50 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Customization - Dynamic Notifications based on Product 
Categorization Table Loop and Notify issue.

**
Instead of doing Notify action, you could do a Push to the AR System Email 
Messages form

Fred

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Barbour, Brandi D
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:02 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Customization - Dynamic Notifications based on Product Categorization 
Table Loop and Notify issue.

**

I have a requirement that at first thought was no big deal.  However, it has 
turned into something more than I expected.  We need our Incident form to page 
out people based on Product categorizations determined by the users through a 
custom form.  There are up to 100 ish people that could potentially get 
notified.  I created a custom form for the users to select the categories they 
wanted to be be notified on.  Then put a table on the incident form and a few 
temp fields for a table loop.  The problem is that even though the Email To 
field is 32000 char limit the actual Filter "Notify" Action To field is limited 
to 254.  Therefore, the notifications are being cut off.  I then tried doing a 
table look and in a Filter Guide adding the Notify to send a notification one 
at a time.  However, this causes a significant delay in the saving of the 
Incident and I get an error at the end about "Does not exist in Database".

Has anyone another idea?  I was thinking I could try using going back to the 
original plan and then creating more temp fields and partitioning it out 
further based on number of char.  Possibly using the listget function to 
retrieve each address and only append 10 to each temp field and notifying off 
those fields, however that is a lot of temp fields to create and I would assume 
performance will still be an issue.



Any other ideas would be appreciated?  I am really hoping I am over thinking 
this.

Thanks,

Brandi



ARS 7.6.4 sp 3

ITSM 7.6.4 sp 2

SQL

Windows

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that your access is unauthorized, and any review, dissemination, distribution 
or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.


_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that your access is unauthorized, and any review, dissemination, distribution 
or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Customization - Dynamic Notifications based on Product Categorization Table Loop and Notify issue.

[Grooms, Frederick W]

Instead of doing Notify action, you could do a Push to the AR System Email 
Messages form

Fred

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Barbour, Brandi D
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:02 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Customization - Dynamic Notifications based on Product Categorization 
Table Loop and Notify issue.

**

I have a requirement that at first thought was no big deal.  However, it has 
turned into something more than I expected.  We need our Incident form to page 
out people based on Product categorizations determined by the users through a 
custom form.  There are up to 100 ish people that could potentially get 
notified.  I created a custom form for the users to select the categories they 
wanted to be be notified on.  Then put a table on the incident form and a few 
temp fields for a table loop.  The problem is that even though the Email To 
field is 32000 char limit the actual Filter "Notify" Action To field is limited 
to 254.  Therefore, the notifications are being cut off.  I then tried doing a 
table look and in a Filter Guide adding the Notify to send a notification one 
at a time.  However, this causes a significant delay in the saving of the 
Incident and I get an error at the end about "Does not exist in Database".

Has anyone another idea?  I was thinking I could try using going back to the 
original plan and then creating more temp fields and partitioning it out 
further based on number of char.  Possibly using the listget function to 
retrieve each address and only append 10 to each temp field and notifying off 
those fields, however that is a lot of temp fields to create and I would assume 
performance will still be an issue.



Any other ideas would be appreciated?  I am really hoping I am over thinking 
this.

Thanks,

Brandi



ARS 7.6.4 sp 3

ITSM 7.6.4 sp 2

SQL

Windows

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that your access is unauthorized, and any review, dissemination, distribution 
or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.



___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Customization - Dynamic Notifications based on Product Categorization Table Loop and Notify issue.

[Barbour, Brandi D]

I have a requirement that at first thought was no big deal.  However, it has 
turned into something more than I expected.  We need our Incident form to page 
out people based on Product categorizations determined by the users through a 
custom form.  There are up to 100 ish people that could potentially get 
notified.  I created a custom form for the users to select the categories they 
wanted to be be notified on.  Then put a table on the incident form and a few 
temp fields for a table loop.  The problem is that even though the Email To 
field is 32000 char limit the actual Filter "Notify" Action To field is limited 
to 254.  Therefore, the notifications are being cut off.  I then tried doing a 
table look and in a Filter Guide adding the Notify to send a notification one 
at a time.  However, this causes a significant delay in the saving of the 
Incident and I get an error at the end about "Does not exist in Database".

Has anyone another idea?  I was thinking I could try using going back to the 
original plan and then creating more temp fields and partitioning it out 
further based on number of char.  Possibly using the listget function to 
retrieve each address and only append 10 to each temp field and notifying off 
those fields, however that is a lot of temp fields to create and I would assume 
performance will still be an issue.



Any other ideas would be appreciated?  I am really hoping I am over thinking 
this.

Thanks,

Brandi



ARS 7.6.4 sp 3

ITSM 7.6.4 sp 2

SQL

Windows

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that your access is unauthorized, and any review, dissemination, distribution 
or copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Mueller, Doug]

Misi,

Yes.  Applications were not overlay aware in 7.6.04.  As soon as an object
is overlay aware, the entire functionality of overlay and custom objects and
such come into play.

Doug Mueller

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 10:35 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

Hi,

And that includes Custom Deployable Apps as well, right?

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se

> Misi,
>
> To address the question about applications and overlays.
>
> Yes, the application issue was addressed and you can create overlays of
> applications from 8.0 forward.
>
> This was an oversight of the initial implementation.
>
> Doug Mueller
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:02 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
>
> Hi,
>
> The problem with a mixed system, is that in Base Development, you can not see
> any Custom/Overlay objects. As a consequence you can not build anything that
> interacts with the Custom/Overlay objects.
>
> So I suggest you do one of two things:
> 1. Do everything in Base Development
> 2. Convert all modifications to Custom/Overlay objects
>
> If you do number 2, you will do all the rest of your development in Best
> Practice Mode.
>
> One lack with Best Practice Mode, is that you can not create Deployable
> Applications there. In that case you have to create those in Base Mode...
> Maybe BMC fixed this in 8.0/8.1, but I have not read anything about it.
>
> Another thing is the more granular overlay feature available in 8.1. I think
> it will be much better to work in an 8.1 system than in previous versions
> where you overlaid complete objects. But I have not tested it yet.
>
> Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
>
> Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
> * 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.
>
>> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for
>> some
>> advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using
>> Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>>
>> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and
>> workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.
>> Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.
>>
>> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
>> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
>> System forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization
>> to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.
>>
>> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.
>> It
>> seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown
>> forms
>> in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the
>> forms
>> showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base
>> Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.
>> To say the least it has become a confusing mess.
>>
>> So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in
>> Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization
>> Mode?
>>
>> Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base
>> Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your opinions.
>> Dave
>>
>> Dave Shellman
>> +1 717 810 3687 tel
>> +1 717 810 2124 fax
>> dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>
>>
>> MS 161-043
>> PO Box 3608
>> Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608
>>
>> [cid:image001.gif@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.te.com/>
>>
>> [cid:image002.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

And that includes Custom Deployable Apps as well, right?

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://rrr.se

> Misi,
>
> To address the question about applications and overlays.
>
> Yes, the application issue was addressed and you can create overlays of
> applications from 8.0 forward.
>
> This was an oversight of the initial implementation.
>
> Doug Mueller
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:02 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
>
> Hi,
>
> The problem with a mixed system, is that in Base Development, you can not see
> any Custom/Overlay objects. As a consequence you can not build anything that
> interacts with the Custom/Overlay objects.
>
> So I suggest you do one of two things:
> 1. Do everything in Base Development
> 2. Convert all modifications to Custom/Overlay objects
>
> If you do number 2, you will do all the rest of your development in Best
> Practice Mode.
>
> One lack with Best Practice Mode, is that you can not create Deployable
> Applications there. In that case you have to create those in Base Mode...
> Maybe BMC fixed this in 8.0/8.1, but I have not read anything about it.
>
> Another thing is the more granular overlay feature available in 8.1. I think
> it will be much better to work in an 8.1 system than in previous versions
> where you overlaid complete objects. But I have not tested it yet.
>
> Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
>
> Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
> * 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.
>
>> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for
>> some
>> advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using
>> Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>>
>> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and
>> workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.
>> Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.
>>
>> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
>> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
>> System forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization
>> to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.
>>
>> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.
>> It
>> seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown
>> forms
>> in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the
>> forms
>> showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base
>> Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.
>> To say the least it has become a confusing mess.
>>
>> So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in
>> Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization
>> Mode?
>>
>> Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base
>> Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your opinions.
>> Dave
>>
>> Dave Shellman
>> +1 717 810 3687 tel
>> +1 717 810 2124 fax
>> dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>
>>
>> MS 161-043
>> PO Box 3608
>> Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608
>>
>> [cid:image001.gif@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.te.com/>
>>
>> [cid:image002.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
>>
>> ___
>> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
>> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Mueller, Doug]

Misi,

To address the question about applications and overlays.

Yes, the application issue was addressed and you can create overlays of
applications from 8.0 forward.

This was an oversight of the initial implementation.

Doug Mueller

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Misi Mladoniczky
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:02 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

Hi,

The problem with a mixed system, is that in Base Development, you can not see
any Custom/Overlay objects. As a consequence you can not build anything that
interacts with the Custom/Overlay objects.

So I suggest you do one of two things:
1. Do everything in Base Development
2. Convert all modifications to Custom/Overlay objects

If you do number 2, you will do all the rest of your development in Best
Practice Mode.

One lack with Best Practice Mode, is that you can not create Deployable
Applications there. In that case you have to create those in Base Mode...
Maybe BMC fixed this in 8.0/8.1, but I have not read anything about it.

Another thing is the more granular overlay feature available in 8.1. I think
it will be much better to work in an 8.1 system than in previous versions
where you overlaid complete objects. But I have not tested it yet.

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)

Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
* 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.

> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for some
> advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using
> Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>
> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and
> workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.
> Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.
>
> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
> System forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization
> to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.
>
> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.  It
> seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown forms
> in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the forms
> showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base
> Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.
> To say the least it has become a confusing mess.
>
> So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in
> Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization
> Mode?
>
> Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base
> Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions.
> Dave
>
> Dave Shellman
> +1 717 810 3687 tel
> +1 717 810 2124 fax
> dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>
>
> MS 161-043
> PO Box 3608
> Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608
>
> [cid:image001.gif@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.te.com/>
>
> [cid:image002.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Lisa Kemes]

This is a more detailed explanation by Doug when I asked the same question
back in 2011.

It's very good!

http://www.javasystemsolutions.com/arslist/view/89043859

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Shellman, David wrote:

> **
>
> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for
> some advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
> using Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>
> ** **
>
> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms
> and workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal
> applications.  Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version
> 3.0.
>
> ** **
>
> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
> System forms, we make sure that we’re working in Best Practice
> Customization to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.  **
> **
>
> ** **
>
> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.
> It seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown
> forms in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of
> the forms showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are
> shown in Base Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice
> Customization Mode.  To say the least it has become a confusing mess.
>
> ** **
>
> So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them
> in Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice
> Customization Mode?
>
> ** **
>
> Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base
> Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions.
>
> Dave
>
> ** **
>
> *Dave Shellman
> *+1 717 810 3687 tel
> +1 717 810 2124 fax
> dave.shell...@te.com
>
>  
>
> MS 161-043
> PO Box 3608
> Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608
>
>
> [image: 
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/smallTElogo.gif]<http://www.te.com/>
> 
>
>  
>
> [image: 
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/twitter.png]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/facebook.png]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/flickr.png]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/linkedin.png]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/youtube.png]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
> 
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

The problem with a mixed system, is that in Base Development, you can not see
any Custom/Overlay objects. As a consequence you can not build anything that
interacts with the Custom/Overlay objects.

So I suggest you do one of two things:
1. Do everything in Base Development
2. Convert all modifications to Custom/Overlay objects

If you do number 2, you will do all the rest of your development in Best
Practice Mode.

One lack with Best Practice Mode, is that you can not create Deployable
Applications there. In that case you have to create those in Base Mode...
Maybe BMC fixed this in 8.0/8.1, but I have not read anything about it.

Another thing is the more granular overlay feature available in 8.1. I think
it will be much better to work in an 8.1 system than in previous versions
where you overlaid complete objects. But I have not tested it yet.

Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)

Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11/12):
* 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.

> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for some
> advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using
> Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>
> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and
> workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.
> Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.
>
> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
> System forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization
> to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.
>
> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.  It
> seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown forms
> in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the forms
> showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base
> Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.
> To say the least it has become a confusing mess.
>
> So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in
> Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization
> Mode?
>
> Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base
> Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions.
> Dave
>
> Dave Shellman
> +1 717 810 3687 tel
> +1 717 810 2124 fax
> dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>
>
> MS 161-043
> PO Box 3608
> Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608
>
> [cid:image001.gif@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.te.com/>
>
> [cid:image002.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[vaibhav wadekar]

Yes it is part of 7.6.04,

On 7.6.04 installed system, you can see the same listed under ..\ARSystem
directory structure

Regards/Vaibhav

On Wednesday, March 6, 2013, Shellman, David wrote:

> **
>
> Thanks Doug.  Is the BPCU utility part of 7.6.04 or do we need to download
> it?
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] *On
> Behalf Of *Mueller, Doug
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 06, 2013 5:31 PM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG  'arslist@ARSLIST.ORG');>
> *Subject:* Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
>
> ** **
>
> ** 
>
> Dave,
>
> ** **
>
> Best practice would be to promote your custom development from base mode
> into custom objects in the
>
> best practice layer.
>
> ** **
>
> The best practice layer (the overlay) contains two types of things.
> Overlays which are things that are
>
> customizations (modifications) to things in the base layer.  And, Custom
> objects which are objects that you
>
> have added to the definitions in base mode.
>
> ** **
>
> Your objects are custom objects not supplied by others.
>
> ** **
>
> This eliminates the confusion of switching modes between your custom
> definitions and making overlays of
>
> BMC definitions.
>
> ** **
>
> You can move things from the base layer into the overlay.
>
> ** **
>
> Note that the BPCU utility will automatically move things for you that are
> not BMC objects from the base layer
>
> to the best practice layer.  You probably want to fix any overlays of your
> custom object first (eliminate them
>
> and make the update to the object itself, then move it.
>
> ** **
>
> I hope this helps,
>
> ** **
>
> Doug Mueller
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Shellman, David
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 06, 2013 1:57 PM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
>
> ** **
>
> ** 
>
> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for
> some advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
> using Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>
> ** **
>
> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms
> and workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal
> applications.  Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version
> 3.0.
>
> ** **
>
> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
> System forms, we make sure that we’re working in Best Practice
> Customization to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.  **
> **
>
> ** **
>
> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.
> It seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown
> forms in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of
> the forms showing up as
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_



-- 
Sent from Gmail Mobile

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Shellman, David]

Thanks Doug.  Is the BPCU utility part of 7.6.04 or do we need to download it?

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Mueller, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 5:31 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

**
Dave,

Best practice would be to promote your custom development from base mode into 
custom objects in the
best practice layer.

The best practice layer (the overlay) contains two types of things.  Overlays 
which are things that are
customizations (modifications) to things in the base layer.  And, Custom 
objects which are objects that you
have added to the definitions in base mode.

Your objects are custom objects not supplied by others.

This eliminates the confusion of switching modes between your custom 
definitions and making overlays of
BMC definitions.

You can move things from the base layer into the overlay.

Note that the BPCU utility will automatically move things for you that are not 
BMC objects from the base layer
to the best practice layer.  You probably want to fix any overlays of your 
custom object first (eliminate them
and make the update to the object itself, then move it.

I hope this helps,

Doug Mueller

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Shellman, David
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 1:57 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

**
It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for some 
advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using 
Developer Studio on 7.6.04.

We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and 
workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.  
Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.

Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and work 
flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR System 
forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization to make 
sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.

While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.  It 
seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown forms 
in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the forms 
showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base 
Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.  To 
say the least it has become a confusing mess.

So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in 
Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization 
Mode?

Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base 
Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?

Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Dave

Dave Shellman
+1 717 810 3687 tel
+1 717 810 2124 fax
dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>

MS 161-043
PO Box 3608
Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608

[cid:image001.gif@01CE1AC0.968821B0]<http://www.te.com/>

[cid:image002.png@01CE1AC0.968821B0]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1AC0.968821B0]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1AC0.968821B0]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1AC0.968821B0]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE1AC0.968821B0]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
<><><><><><>

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Jason Miller]

We are working in Base Development Mode in our system that was upgraded
from 7.5 to 7.6.04 a few months ago.  Our train of thought is we have been
getting by without Overlays for this long and we have already customized AR
System forms using pre-Overlay practices.  Other than patches and service
packs there really is no benefit to using Overlays.  Admittedly we do not
have any plans to take this system past 7.6.04 since access is primarily
via WUT.  Ideally we'll convert the customizations of out of box AR System
objects to Overlays but I don't think we'll get to it.  As we move in-house
apps to our 8.1 system we'll convert to Base and begin using Overlays.

I also worked in Base Mode building a certain conference's Remedy app.  I
started out in Best Practice Mode but found it too frustrating when
encountering issues with the initial release of Overlays.  Primarily I
wasn't able to create a deployable app (a best practice) using Best
Practice mode.  There was a deadline to stick to and I didn't have time to
mess with new Overly challenges.  Now that the app is built, there is
support for deployable apps and the server is 8.0 (will be 8.1 within the
next week) I am considering converting the app to Custom.

One thing that has been a challenge is working in both 7.6.04 Base and
8.0/8.1 Best Practice systems throughout the day.  I need to have multiple
Dev Studio instances open. I have 3 PCs at my desk so it hasn't been too
bad but there are times I want to copy or compare something between
different mode servers and have to juggle the modes around in one instance.

I suggest definitely figure out which direction you are going to go as an
organization and make sure everybody is doing it the same way.

Jason


On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Shellman, David wrote:

> **
>
> It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for
> some advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization
> using Developer Studio on 7.6.04.
>
> ** **
>
> We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms
> and workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal
> applications.  Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version
> 3.0.
>
> ** **
>
> Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and
> work flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR
> System forms, we make sure that we’re working in Best Practice
> Customization to make sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.  **
> **
>
> ** **
>
> While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.
> It seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown
> forms in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of
> the forms showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are
> shown in Base Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice
> Customization Mode.  To say the least it has become a confusing mess.
>
> ** **
>
> So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them
> in Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice
> Customization Mode?
>
> ** **
>
> Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base
> Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks in advance for your opinions.
>
> Dave
>
> ** **
>
> *Dave Shellman
> *+1 717 810 3687 tel
> +1 717 810 2124 fax
> dave.shell...@te.com
>
>  
>
> MS 161-043
> PO Box 3608
> Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608
>
>
> [image: 
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/smallTElogo.gif]<http://www.te.com/>
> 
>
>  
>
> [image: 
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/twitter.png]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/facebook.png]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/flickr.png]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/linkedin.png]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[image:
> http://www.te.com/imagesTE/socialmedia/youtube.png]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
> 
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
<><><><><><>

Re: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Mueller, Doug]

Dave,

Best practice would be to promote your custom development from base mode into 
custom objects in the
best practice layer.

The best practice layer (the overlay) contains two types of things.  Overlays 
which are things that are
customizations (modifications) to things in the base layer.  And, Custom 
objects which are objects that you
have added to the definitions in base mode.

Your objects are custom objects not supplied by others.

This eliminates the confusion of switching modes between your custom 
definitions and making overlays of
BMC definitions.

You can move things from the base layer into the overlay.

Note that the BPCU utility will automatically move things for you that are not 
BMC objects from the base layer
to the best practice layer.  You probably want to fix any overlays of your 
custom object first (eliminate them
and make the update to the object itself, then move it.

I hope this helps,

Doug Mueller

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Shellman, David
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 1:57 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

**
It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for some 
advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using 
Developer Studio on 7.6.04.

We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and 
workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.  
Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.

Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and work 
flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR System 
forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization to make 
sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.

While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.  It 
seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown forms 
in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the forms 
showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base 
Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.  To 
say the least it has become a confusing mess.

So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in 
Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization 
Mode?

Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base 
Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?

Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Dave

Dave Shellman
+1 717 810 3687 tel
+1 717 810 2124 fax
dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>

MS 161-043
PO Box 3608
Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608

[cid:image001.gif@01CE1A77.2F911230]<http://www.te.com/>

[cid:image002.png@01CE1A77.2F911230]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1A77.2F911230]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1A77.2F911230]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1A77.2F911230]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE1A77.2F911230]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
<><><><><><>

Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization

[Shellman, David]

It seems we have gotten in a pickle with a few of our forms.  Looking for some 
advice/help with Base Development vs. Best Practice Customization using 
Developer Studio on 7.6.04.

We have a number of forms that were developed over the years.  The forms and 
workflow were all developed in house creating our own internal applications.  
Some of these forms go all the way back to AR System version 3.0.

Move forward to being on version 7.6.04 and we are modifying the forms and work 
flow with Developer Studio.  For any changes we need to make to any AR System 
forms, we make sure that we're working in Best Practice Customization to make 
sure that Overlays are used for future upgrades.

While working on the homegrown apps, we were using Base Development Mode.  It 
seems that periodically, individuals would be working on the home grown forms 
in Best Practice Customization Mode.  We are starting to see some of the forms 
showing up as Overlays, some of the views have fields that are shown in Base 
Development Mode and some fields shown in Best Practice Customization Mode.  To 
say the least it has become a confusing mess.

So I need to ask, what do others do with home grown forms?  Work on them in 
Base Development Mode or do you do everything in Best Practice Customization 
Mode?

Anyone know of a good way to either convert a mixed form back to Base 
Development or switch everything to Best Practice Customization?

Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Dave

Dave Shellman
+1 717 810 3687 tel
+1 717 810 2124 fax
dave.shell...@te.com<mailto:dave.shell...@te.com>

MS 161-043
PO Box 3608
Harrisburg, PA 17105-3608

[cid:image001.gif@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.te.com/>

[cid:image002.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://twitter.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image003.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.facebook.com/teconnectivity>[cid:image004.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.flickr.com/photos/teconnectivity/>[cid:image005.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1591657>[cid:image006.png@01CE1A8B.A3B6DE10]<http://www.youtube.com/teconnectivity>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
<><><><><><>

SLM Customization - Help Needed

[Shivanand Jeerigiwad]

Hi All,

I have a customization on SLM but not getting how to start as i am a
fresher to customization.
Requirement is :

   - For Resolution Service Targets, when the service target is met (e.g.
   Status >= Resolved) and then time has passed passes, when the request is
   re-opened, the amount of business time between the time the service target
   was met and the current time needs to be added back to the service target
   goal



Here is a scenario to support this, say there is resolution service target
with a 4 hr target attached to an 8am – 5pm business time entity.  A ticket
is opened at 4pm and then resolved at 4:30 which ‘met the service target’.
Now at 10am the next business day, the request is reopened.  The
accumulated total “Open Time”/Elapsed in the SLM:Measurement record for
that target should be 3 hours (1 hour from the previous day and 2 hours the
next morning as we only count business time) and continue from that point
(1 hour remaining in the target) instead of resuming at 30 minutes elapsed
time as the out-of-box behavior would be.  If the request would have been
reopened at 1pm instead of 9am, the request would already have the service
target breached.
Please help me.

-- 
With regards
Shivanand Jeerigiwad

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Customization on IM COnsole

[patchsk]

Option1: Let the users use Overview console, instead of Incident console. 
In this case no customization is needed.
Option 2:There could be a better solution, but without spending too much 
time  I think this will get what you need.
1.You could create a sql JOIN (if it is not there with all the information 
you need) between HelpDesk and Task with left outer join, so that you see
   all the Incident tickets from HPD and all the incidents from tasks with 
matching incident number, along with a where clause as you mentioned for 
filtering   by user or group.
2. Then create a sql view on that JOIN with DISTINCT on Incident Number
3. Create a Remedy view form on that sql view and use this for your table 
field.
Option3: See if you could use the base form of overview console table and 
filtering out change tkts etc..


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Customization on IM COnsole

[Bhupesh Gupta]

Dear Friends,

Please help in the below customization:

 I need to show thos Incidents as well in IM Consoloe in 7.6.04 which meet
the below critiria as well .
the incidents which are not assigned, but have tasks that are assigned (to
user or groups) will also be shown. In these cases, user will need to look
at task tab for details.


This is not OTB. Workflow needs to be written for this.


The challenge here, multiple task can have same incident number and the
relationship between  them is bounded by the incident number



Just for the Scenario: Assigned to ME



Incident qualification is   'Status' < "Resolved" AND (('Assignee Login ID'
= "Allen") OR ('Owner Login ID'="Allen"))



Now we need to make it sth like



('Status' < "Resolved" AND (('Assignee Login ID' = "Allen") OR ('Owner
Login ID'="Allen")))



 OR



 (Select * from Incident where Incident number in (Distinct *Incidents from
tasks where ('TASK Assignee Login ID' = "Allen") OR ('TASK Owner Login
ID'="Allen")) from Tasks))*



let me check if it is feasible or not.



With Warm Regards,

Bhupesh Gupta





·--
Regards,
Bhupesh Gupta

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

[Venkat Arcot]

Tommy,

 

What we are looking for is to show the SHR:Landing console with the
collapsible Application menu but without the overview console. Currently
by default when the use logs in the SHR:Landing console is opening with
the overview console to the right of the Application menu. What we are
looking for is to see just the application menu without the overview
console 

 

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 8:29 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

 

I had to set the Home Page in User Preference to NULL.

 

-Original Message-

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Reinfeldt

Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:56 PM

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG

Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

 

So, to be clear, what is the Default Home Form set to in the ar.cfg?
And what is it set to in the User Preference record of the person(s) you
are testing as?

 

-Original Message-

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat Arcot

Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:44 PM

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG

Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

 

I tried that but it overrides the default page that we set. It always
displays the AR System Customizable Home Page with overview console

 

Thanks,

Venkat. 

832-320-5778

-Original Message-

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Reinfeldt

Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:27 PM

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG

Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

 

Venkat,

 

Look in your ar.cfg or through the 'Server Information' component of the
AR System Administration Console for the 'Default Home Form'.  OOB, I
believe it is now set to the 'AR System Customizable Home Page'.  You
can change it through the 'Server Information' page or by manually
setting it in the ar.cfg file.  Additionally, you can set it on an
individual basis through the AR System User Preference form on the 'Home
Page' tab.

 

Good luck,

 

Matt R.

 

-Original Message-

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat A

Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:18 PM

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG

Subject: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

 

Hello Listeners,

 

We upgraded our ITSM to 7.6.04 sp2 but when the user logs in the
overview console displays by default. Is there a way we turn off the
overview console from displayng and set our own custom webpage in it's
place. Any help will be greatly appreciated

 

Thanks,

Venkat

 



___

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"

 

 

This electronic message and any attached documents are intended only for
the named addressee(s). This communication from TransCanada may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
disclosure and it must not be disclosed, copied, forwarded or
distributed without authorization. If you have received this message in
error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original
message. Thank you.

 




___

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"

 



This electronic message and any attached documents are intended only for the 
named addressee(s). This communication from TransCanada may contain information 
that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and it 
must not be disclosed, copied, forwarded or distributed without authorization. 
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and delete the original message. Thank you.


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
<>

Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

[Tommy Morris]

I had to set the Home Page in User Preference to NULL.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Reinfeldt
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:56 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

So, to be clear, what is the Default Home Form set to in the ar.cfg?  And what 
is it set to in the User Preference record of the person(s) you are testing as?

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat Arcot
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

I tried that but it overrides the default page that we set. It always displays 
the AR System Customizable Home Page with overview console

Thanks,
Venkat. 
832-320-5778
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Reinfeldt
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:27 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Venkat,

Look in your ar.cfg or through the 'Server Information' component of the AR 
System Administration Console for the 'Default Home Form'.  OOB, I believe it 
is now set to the 'AR System Customizable Home Page'.  You can change it 
through the 'Server Information' page or by manually setting it in the ar.cfg 
file.  Additionally, you can set it on an individual basis through the AR 
System User Preference form on the 'Home Page' tab.

Good luck,

Matt R.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat A
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:18 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Hello Listeners,
 
We upgraded our ITSM to 7.6.04 sp2 but when the user logs in the overview 
console displays by default. Is there a way we turn off the overview console 
from displayng and set our own custom webpage in it's place. Any help will be 
greatly appreciated
 
Thanks,
Venkat


___
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"


This electronic message and any attached documents are intended only for the 
named addressee(s). This communication from TransCanada may contain information 
that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and it 
must not be disclosed, copied, forwarded or distributed without authorization. 
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and delete the original message. Thank you.


___
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"

Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

[Matt Reinfeldt]

So, to be clear, what is the Default Home Form set to in the ar.cfg?  And
what is it set to in the User Preference record of the person(s) you are
testing as?

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat Arcot
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

I tried that but it overrides the default page that we set. It always
displays the AR System Customizable Home Page with overview console

Thanks,
Venkat. 
832-320-5778
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Reinfeldt
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:27 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Venkat,

Look in your ar.cfg or through the 'Server Information' component of the AR
System Administration Console for the 'Default Home Form'.  OOB, I believe
it is now set to the 'AR System Customizable Home Page'.  You can change it
through the 'Server Information' page or by manually setting it in the
ar.cfg file.  Additionally, you can set it on an individual basis through
the AR System User Preference form on the 'Home Page' tab.

Good luck,

Matt R.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat A
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:18 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Hello Listeners,
 
We upgraded our ITSM to 7.6.04 sp2 but when the user logs in the overview
console displays by default. Is there a way we turn off the overview console
from displayng and set our own custom webpage in it's place. Any help will
be greatly appreciated
 
Thanks,
Venkat


___
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"


This electronic message and any attached documents are intended only for the
named addressee(s). This communication from TransCanada may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
disclosure and it must not be disclosed, copied, forwarded or distributed
without authorization. If you have received this message in error, please
notify the sender immediately and delete the original message. Thank you.


___
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"

Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

[Venkat Arcot]

I tried that but it overrides the default page that we set. It always
displays the AR System Customizable Home Page with overview console

Thanks,
Venkat. 
832-320-5778
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Reinfeldt
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:27 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Venkat,

Look in your ar.cfg or through the 'Server Information' component of the
AR System Administration Console for the 'Default Home Form'.  OOB, I
believe it is now set to the 'AR System Customizable Home Page'.  You
can change it through the 'Server Information' page or by manually
setting it in the ar.cfg file.  Additionally, you can set it on an
individual basis through the AR System User Preference form on the 'Home
Page' tab.

Good luck,

Matt R.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat A
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:18 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Hello Listeners,
 
We upgraded our ITSM to 7.6.04 sp2 but when the user logs in the
overview console displays by default. Is there a way we turn off the
overview console from displayng and set our own custom webpage in it's
place. Any help will be greatly appreciated
 
Thanks,
Venkat


___
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"


This electronic message and any attached documents are intended only for the 
named addressee(s). This communication from TransCanada may contain information 
that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and it 
must not be disclosed, copied, forwarded or distributed without authorization. 
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and delete the original message. Thank you.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

[Matt Reinfeldt]

Venkat,

Look in your ar.cfg or through the 'Server Information' component of the AR 
System Administration Console for the 'Default Home Form'.  OOB, I believe it 
is now set to the 'AR System Customizable Home Page'.  You can change it 
through the 'Server Information' page or by manually setting it in the ar.cfg 
file.  Additionally, you can set it on an individual basis through the AR 
System User Preference form on the 'Home Page' tab.

Good luck,

Matt R.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Venkat A
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:18 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

Hello Listeners,
 
We upgraded our ITSM to 7.6.04 sp2 but when the user logs in the overview 
console displays by default. Is there a way we turn off the overview console 
from displayng and set our own custom webpage in it's place. Any help will be 
greatly appreciated
 
Thanks,
Venkat

___
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"

Homepage customization in 7.6.04 sp2

[Venkat A]

Hello Listeners,
 
We upgraded our ITSM to 7.6.04 sp2 but when the user logs in the overview 
console displays by default. Is there a way we turn off the overview console 
from displayng and set our own custom webpage in it's place. Any help will be 
greatly appreciated
 
Thanks,
Venkat

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Thank Christine for bringing that one up :-).. Sometimes in an effort such as 
this, it may be a good idea to see what newbies may want to see so they could 
use it as a stepping stone to smoothen the learning curve..

Joe

From: Jason Miller 
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:29 PM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

** Documenting the underlying DB is a great idea!  Joe, you rock!

Jason


On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Joe Martin D'Souza  wrote:

  That documentation is a work in progress, but we decided to publish it so it 
becomes an available resource for those who want to access it while its being 
documented..

  To answer Christine's email, it’s a single repository for all AR System based 
applications such as Incident, Problem, Asset and Change which include the CMDB 
component.

  Maybe I'll add a section about the underlying DB in that documentation..

  Joe

  -Original Message- From: Misi Mladoniczky
  Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:02 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general
  To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
  Subject: Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question 


  Hi,

  And here is a document at BMCDN:
  https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-17063

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.



Trying to understand how Remedy works from a customization perspective..

We have Incident, Asset, Change and Release Management currently running
in
our environment, 7.5

Is there a DB for each module or does Remedy contain 1 DB that all
modules
map to?
When we customize (add a field to a form), how difficult is that?
Can a new field be mapped to an unpopulated field in the DB?
What are the best practices for customizing? (right now, looking to
customize Incident)

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!

thanks
c
**
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain
confidential information and is intended solely for use by
the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not
disclose its contents to others and delete it from your
system.

**

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

[Jason Miller]

Documenting the underlying DB is a great idea!  Joe, you rock!

Jason

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Joe Martin D'Souza wrote:

> That documentation is a work in progress, but we decided to publish it so
> it becomes an available resource for those who want to access it while its
> being documented..
>
> To answer Christine's email, it’s a single repository for all AR System
> based applications such as Incident, Problem, Asset and Change which include
> the CMDB component.
>
> Maybe I'll add a section about the underlying DB in that documentation..
>
> Joe
>
> -Original Message- From: Misi Mladoniczky
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:02 PM Newsgroups:
> public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question
>
>
> Hi,
>
> And here is a document at BMCDN:
> https://communities.bmc.com/**communities/docs/DOC-17063<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-17063>
>
>   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.
>
>
>> Trying to understand how Remedy works from a customization perspective..
>>
>> We have Incident, Asset, Change and Release Management currently running
>> in
>> our environment, 7.5
>>
>> Is there a DB for each module or does Remedy contain 1 DB that all
>> modules
>> map to?
>> When we customize (add a field to a form), how difficult is that?
>> Can a new field be mapped to an unpopulated field in the DB?
>> What are the best practices for customizing? (right now, looking to
>> customize Incident)
>>
>> Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!
>>
>> thanks
>> c
>> 
>> **
>> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain
>> confidential information and is intended solely for use by
>> the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
>> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not
>> disclose its contents to others and delete it from your
>> system.
>>
>> 
>> **
>>
>> __**__**
>> ___
>> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
>> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>>
>>
> __**__**
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
> __**__**
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

That documentation is a work in progress, but we decided to publish it so it 
becomes an available resource for those who want to access it while its 
being documented..


To answer Christine's email, it’s a single repository for all AR System 
based applications such as Incident, Problem, Asset and Change which include 
the CMDB component.


Maybe I'll add a section about the underlying DB in that documentation..

Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Misi Mladoniczky
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:02 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

Hi,

And here is a document at BMCDN:
https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-17063

   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.



Trying to understand how Remedy works from a customization perspective..

We have Incident, Asset, Change and Release Management currently running
in
our environment, 7.5

Is there a DB for each module or does Remedy contain 1 DB that all
modules
map to?
When we customize (add a field to a form), how difficult is that?
Can a new field be mapped to an unpopulated field in the DB?
What are the best practices for customizing? (right now, looking to
customize Incident)

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!

thanks
c
**
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain
confidential information and is intended solely for use by
the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not
disclose its contents to others and delete it from your
system.

**

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"



___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" 


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

And here is a document at BMCDN:
https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-17063

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.

>
> Trying to understand how Remedy works from a customization perspective..
>
> We have Incident, Asset, Change and Release Management currently running
> in
> our environment, 7.5
>
> Is there a DB for each module or does Remedy contain 1 DB that all
> modules
> map to?
> When we customize (add a field to a form), how difficult is that?
> Can a new field be mapped to an unpopulated field in the DB?
> What are the best practices for customizing? (right now, looking to
> customize Incident)
>
> Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!
>
> thanks
> c
> **
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain
> confidential information and is intended solely for use by
> the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not
> disclose its contents to others and delete it from your
> system.
>
> **
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

[Misi Mladoniczky]

Hi,

It is only one database.

It is easy to add a field. The server will automatically add a column to
the form-specific table.

It is NOT that easy to maintain or do correct customization of ITSM
applications.

In theory, this will be easier when you are on 7.6.04 and later, as you
can separate your customizations/overlays from the base functionality
supplied by BMC.

Best Practices, or so I believe:
- Change no objects, only add things.
- If a change is needed, disable/hide the original object and add yours
with a similar name. I would suggest to start with the same name, and then
add a suffix for your own stuff.

>From a maintenance perspective, I suggest that you DOCUMENT EVERYTHING you
do, and then redo/check these changes after you do a new install/upgrade
in the future.

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.

>
> Trying to understand how Remedy works from a customization perspective..
>
> We have Incident, Asset, Change and Release Management currently running
> in
> our environment, 7.5
>
> Is there a DB for each module or does Remedy contain 1 DB that all
> modules
> map to?
> When we customize (add a field to a form), how difficult is that?
> Can a new field be mapped to an unpopulated field in the DB?
> What are the best practices for customizing? (right now, looking to
> customize Incident)
>
> Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!
>
> thanks
> c
> **
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain
> confidential information and is intended solely for use by
> the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not
> disclose its contents to others and delete it from your
> system.
>
> **
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Remedy DB / customization - Basic question

[Christine Milton Hall]

Trying to understand how Remedy works from a customization perspective..

We have Incident, Asset, Change and Release Management currently running in
our environment, 7.5

Is there a DB for each module or does Remedy contain 1 DB that all  modules
map to?
When we customize (add a field to a form), how difficult is that?
Can a new field be mapped to an unpopulated field in the DB?
What are the best practices for customizing? (right now, looking to
customize Incident)

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!

thanks
c
**
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain 
confidential information and is intended solely for use by 
the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not 
disclose its contents to others and delete it from your 
system.

**

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 - ARERR 5334 Cannot switch to Best Practice Customization mode

[Tony Cesaro]

LJ,

That worked perfectly.  Thanks for your help with this!

Regards,

Tony Cesaro
aces...@gmail.com
http://amcpu.org


On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:38 PM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

> **
>
> Tony,
>
> Go into your ‘Group’ form and set one of your permission groups ‘Overlay
> Group’ flag to 1.  Then make sure any of your developers you want to run in
> ‘Best Practice Mode’ have that permission group….you should be good from
> there.
>
>
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Tony Cesaro
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:20 AM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 - ARERR 5334 Cannot switch to Best
> Practice Customization mode
>
>
>
> **
>
> Has anyone run into this issue and resolved it?  When I am in Base
> Development mode and attempt to switch back to Best Practice Customization
> mode, I get the following error message:
>
>
>
> "Cannot switch to Best Practice Customization mode. You are part of the
> Overlay base group on one or more of the servers that you are logged into.
> (ARERR 5334)."
>
>
>
> I have looked on the ARSList, BMC Communities, BMC Support Knowledge Base,
> and the ARSystem Error Messages PDF and cannot find any other description of
> this error anywhere.  I have even turned on and analyzed logs on the
> ARSystem side to see what is throwing this error but I don't see anything.
>
>
>
> I wanted to send this out to the list before I open a support case on it.
> If I do end up with a case, I will post the solution to the list.  Thanks
> for any help anyone can provide.
>
>
>
> ARS 7.6.04 Linux
>
> Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 (this also happened in 7.6.04)
>
> Oracle 11g
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Tony Cesaro
> aces...@gmail.com
> http://amcpu.org
>
> _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
> _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 - ARERR 5334 Cannot switch to Best Practice Customization mode

[LJ LongWing]

Tony,

Go into your 'Group' form and set one of your permission groups 'Overlay
Group' flag to 1.  Then make sure any of your developers you want to run in
'Best Practice Mode' have that permission group..you should be good from
there.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tony Cesaro
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:20 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 - ARERR 5334 Cannot switch to Best
Practice Customization mode

 

** 

Has anyone run into this issue and resolved it?  When I am in Base
Development mode and attempt to switch back to Best Practice Customization
mode, I get the following error message:

 

"Cannot switch to Best Practice Customization mode. You are part of the
Overlay base group on one or more of the servers that you are logged into.
(ARERR 5334)."

 

I have looked on the ARSList, BMC Communities, BMC Support Knowledge Base,
and the ARSystem Error Messages PDF and cannot find any other description of
this error anywhere.  I have even turned on and analyzed logs on the
ARSystem side to see what is throwing this error but I don't see anything.

 

I wanted to send this out to the list before I open a support case on it.
If I do end up with a case, I will post the solution to the list.  Thanks
for any help anyone can provide.

 

ARS 7.6.04 Linux

Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 (this also happened in 7.6.04)

Oracle 11g

 

Regards,


Tony Cesaro
aces...@gmail.com
http://amcpu.org <http://amcpu.org/> 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 - ARERR 5334 Cannot switch to Best Practice Customization mode

[Tony Cesaro]

Has anyone run into this issue and resolved it?  When I am in Base
Development mode and attempt to switch back to Best Practice Customization
mode, I get the following error message:

"Cannot switch to Best Practice Customization mode. You are part of the
Overlay base group on one or more of the servers that you are logged into.
(ARERR 5334)."

I have looked on the ARSList, BMC Communities, BMC Support Knowledge Base,
and the ARSystem Error Messages PDF and cannot find any other description of
this error anywhere.  I have even turned on and analyzed logs on the
ARSystem side to see what is throwing this error but I don't see anything.

I wanted to send this out to the list before I open a support case on it.
If I do end up with a case, I will post the solution to the list.  Thanks
for any help anyone can provide.

ARS 7.6.04 Linux
Developer Studio 7.6.04 SP1 (this also happened in 7.6.04)
Oracle 11g

Regards,

Tony Cesaro
aces...@gmail.com
http://amcpu.org

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Customization Approval Process Question

[Jason Miller]

We are starting our work group meetings next month getting ready to
transition.  What you describe sound a lot like what I think we are about to
experience.  It also sounds like Claire and I have similar situations from
the versions to the clinical needs that have been accommodated over the
years.

Although we have been promoting this "upgrade" for over a year and have been
showing off pieces of the new environment I don't think it has occurred to
most of our IT dept that almost all of their precious custom forms, fields
and custom enforcement rules are toast.  Our Sr. leadership is supporting
the minimal customization approach however we are not far enough to get any
kickback yet.

We have also announced the new environment is completely web based.  So far
most people think this is cool.  I am really looking forward to not having
to support a thick client anymore.  The MT performance has been
outstanding!  (I am especially impressed with 7.6.04 and IE9)  We'll see if
that remains true under user load but we are planning on server groups and
balanced Mid-Tiers so it should scale.  All of our users are in the same
county, on our fast WAN and our concurrent user base is not nearly as high
as what I have seen people on the list talk about (although we do anticipate
Remedy usage expanding throughout the enterprise).

We have never had a solid process for requesting changes or receiving
approval.  Up until a few years ago all it took was an email or call to a
developer and the change would be made in production within minutes.  People
are finally use to putting in CM requests and not looking for instant
changes.  We also adopted Tuesday and Thursday as the only days for
production changes which helps with expectations.  What we still lack is any
kind approval process or proof of business need/benefit.  Time and time
again we have built or customized something to find later it was never used
(but we had not power to say no).  I find many of our
customizations/extensions/enhancements are to address user behavior, things
that could be handled by training and mentoring.  We have some managers that
want to manage with Remedy code.  We have suggested to our VP (who "owns"
Remedy) that we create a change committee for Remedy.  She is supportive of
the idea so we'll see how that pans out.

On one hand I wonder if we are killing what made Remedy so useful to our
organization (flexibility) but on the other hand the experience of using our
Remedy environment is so inconsistent, fragmented and in some situations
painful.  We can't properly maintain all of the (undocumented)
customizations and home grown apps.  We have a home grown identity
management app that you have to be a specialist to use. You need to know to
check this box, select this value from this menu, pull your left ear with
your right hand and click Save 2 times to get things to work right.  Granted
this app has a lot of automation built into it (AD automation, is referenced
for password synchronization and account build automation, automatic notices
to managers/HR, etc) but overall the pieces don't work well together unless
everything is done just right.

On the other hand with each group being allowed to customize themselves into
their own little corner, we (IT) don't always play well together.  We (the
Remedy team and leadership) are really looking forward to process
consistency and being able to have multiple groups work together on a change
request instead of each one having their own form.  Once the battle dies
down and people's feelings are no longer hurt because they don't have their
own special little place anymore, I think we can start to work much more
efficiently as an IT department as a whole.  That or there will be a pile of
bloody Remedy programmers/admin corpses left laying around.  If you don't
see me at WWRUG11 you'll know how things went.

Jason

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:26 PM, patchsk  wrote:

> Sometimes it is very hard to find a balance between the user
> experience and handling of the customizations.
> We went through similar review where our VP discarded 90 percent of
> the customizations for the new upgrade.
> But during the training/demos users are pissed off because
> 1. It is completely web based and slower than user tool
> 2. They are loosing the look and feel or the handy customizations they
> had for the past six years
> 3.With the best practice views many fields that were in the classic
> view are either no more used or hidden or not easily accessible.
> So we had to rebuild some of the easy ones from the discarded
> customizations to get a buy in for UAT sign off.
> With new version OOTB there are only very few fields that are required
> to close a ticket, and it will mess up several  matrics/reports.
> For example Product or Operational categorization are optional OOTB,
> and they are required for metrics

Re: Customization Approval Process Question

[patchsk]

Sometimes it is very hard to find a balance between the user
experience and handling of the customizations.
We went through similar review where our VP discarded 90 percent of
the customizations for the new upgrade.
But during the training/demos users are pissed off because
1. It is completely web based and slower than user tool
2. They are loosing the look and feel or the handy customizations they
had for the past six years
3.With the best practice views many fields that were in the classic
view are either no more used or hidden or not easily accessible.
So we had to rebuild some of the easy ones from the discarded
customizations to get a buy in for UAT sign off.
With new version OOTB there are only very few fields that are required
to close a ticket, and it will mess up several  matrics/reports.
For example Product or Operational categorization are optional OOTB,
and they are required for metrics,auto assignments,approvals in our
company.
Users were asking for several process enforcement rules like they must
enter data in field x, if there is a value in field y etc..
It was very hard to convince users that  many of their requirements
are user training issue rather than a tool customization.
At the end we had to reject the user requests and direct them to VP
and CAB to get the sign off.


On May 3, 1:18 pm, "Sanford, Claire"
 wrote:
> This is what we want them to fill out before going to the CAB.
>
> They are fields that were added to the old HD form and the old CHG form that 
> in the past all they had to do was put in a request with approval from a 
> Director and they could have it added.
>
> With this implementation, there are new rules.  No 
> enhancements/customizations unless they can justify the need and get it past 
> the CAB or a System Executive (VP).
>
> 
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:11 PM
> To: arsl...@arslist.org
> Subject: Re: Customization Approval Process Question
>
> **
>
> Isn't that what the Change Management process is for?  The CAB decides what 
> is worth pursuing.
>
> Rick
>
> On May 3, 2011 6:59 AM, "Sanford, Claire" 
> mailto:claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org>>
>  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > When you have a customer that wants a customization made, do you have a 
> > special requirements document you have them complete?
>
> > I have my gazillion customizations in the 6.0 version of HelpDesk and in 
> > order for them to move to the new ITSM 7.6.4, the users will have to 
> > provide some form of justification for needing something that is not OOB.
>
> > We have determined that MANY of them are adaptable to some of the newer 
> > processes, some customizations are so complex and very clinical in nature, 
> > there is no place in the OOB version for them.
>
> > Suggestions? Samples?
>
> > Claire Sanford
> > Information Systems Division
> > Memorial Hermann Healthcare System
> > System Services Tower North - 2:105
> > 920 Frostwood, Houston, TX 77024
> > Phone: 713 338 6035
> > claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org<mailto:claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org>
>
> > ___ 
> > 
> > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives 
> > atwww.arslist.org<http://www.arslist.org>
> > attend wwrug11www.wwrug.com<http://www.wwrug.com> ARSList: "Where the 
> > Answers Are"
>
> _attend WWRUG11www.wwrug.comARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
>
> ___ 
> 
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11www.wwrug.comARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Customization Approval Process Question

[Sanford, Claire]

This is what we want them to fill out before going to the CAB.

They are fields that were added to the old HD form and the old CHG form that in 
the past all they had to do was put in a request with approval from a Director 
and they could have it added.

With this implementation, there are new rules.  No enhancements/customizations 
unless they can justify the need and get it past the CAB or a System Executive 
(VP).


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:11 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Customization Approval Process Question

**

Isn't that what the Change Management process is for?  The CAB decides what is 
worth pursuing.

Rick

On May 3, 2011 6:59 AM, "Sanford, Claire" 
mailto:claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org>> 
wrote:
> When you have a customer that wants a customization made, do you have a 
> special requirements document you have them complete?
>
> I have my gazillion customizations in the 6.0 version of HelpDesk and in 
> order for them to move to the new ITSM 7.6.4, the users will have to provide 
> some form of justification for needing something that is not OOB.
>
> We have determined that MANY of them are adaptable to some of the newer 
> processes, some customizations are so complex and very clinical in nature, 
> there is no place in the OOB version for them.
>
> Suggestions? Samples?
>
>
>
> Claire Sanford
> Information Systems Division
> Memorial Hermann Healthcare System
> System Services Tower North - 2:105
> 920 Frostwood, Houston, TX 77024
> Phone: 713 338 6035
> claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org<mailto:claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org>
>
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at 
> www.arslist.org<http://www.arslist.org>
> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com<http://www.wwrug.com> ARSList: "Where the 
> Answers Are"
_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Customization Approval Process Question

[Rick Cook]

Isn't that what the Change Management process is for?  The CAB decides what
is worth pursuing.

Rick
On May 3, 2011 6:59 AM, "Sanford, Claire" <
claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org> wrote:
> When you have a customer that wants a customization made, do you have a
special requirements document you have them complete?
>
> I have my gazillion customizations in the 6.0 version of HelpDesk and in
order for them to move to the new ITSM 7.6.4, the users will have to provide
some form of justification for needing something that is not OOB.
>
> We have determined that MANY of them are adaptable to some of the newer
processes, some customizations are so complex and very clinical in nature,
there is no place in the OOB version for them.
>
> Suggestions? Samples?
>
>
>
> Claire Sanford
> Information Systems Division
> Memorial Hermann Healthcare System
> System Services Tower North - 2:105
> 920 Frostwood, Houston, TX 77024
> Phone: 713 338 6035
> claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org
>
>
>
>
___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Customization Approval Process Question

[William Rentfrow]

Easy - don't ask them for what customizations they want.  Don't even
suggest it.

 

We have pretty rigidly adapted the position of "Document your business
needs"  For example, a case might need XYZ pieces of information
registered to meet contractual obligations..

 

Then we do everything we can to use base functionality to fulfill those
needs. Sometimes it is not possible and needs  an integration (which we
do not consider a customization as long as base app code isn't touched).

 

If a business need can not be fulfilled then return the list to them and
ask them to prioritize it as "nice to have", "important", etc - and only
then tell them you may need to customize but first you want to
investigate changing their business processes - and see if you can
actually make the work with the app in a reasonable way. Many times you
can - often you can't.

 

We managed to get a "wishlist" of 200+ customizations and tweaks down to
about 10 doing this on our latest go-round of upgrades.

 

B.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Sanford, Claire
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 3:28 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Customization Approval Process Question

 

** 

When you have a customer that wants a customization made, do you have a
special requirements document you have them complete?

 

I have my gazillion customizations in the 6.0 version of HelpDesk and in
order for them to move to the new ITSM 7.6.4, the users will have to
provide some form of justification for needing something that is not
OOB.

 

We have determined that MANY of them are adaptable to some of the newer
processes, some customizations are so complex and very clinical in
nature, there is no place in the OOB version for them.

 

Suggestions?  Samples?

 

 

Claire Sanford 
Information Systems Division 
Memorial Hermann Healthcare System
System Services Tower North - 2:105 
920 Frostwood, Houston, TX 77024 
Phone: 713 338 6035 
claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org 

 

 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Customization Approval Process Question

[Sanford, Claire]

When you have a customer that wants a customization made, do you have a special 
requirements document you have them complete?

I have my gazillion customizations in the 6.0 version of HelpDesk and in order 
for them to move to the new ITSM 7.6.4, the users will have to provide some 
form of justification for needing something that is not OOB.

We have determined that MANY of them are adaptable to some of the newer 
processes, some customizations are so complex and very clinical in nature, 
there is no place in the OOB version for them.

Suggestions?  Samples?



Claire Sanford
Information Systems Division
Memorial Hermann Healthcare System
System Services Tower North - 2:105
920 Frostwood, Houston, TX 77024
Phone: 713 338 6035
claire.sanf...@memorialhermann.org



___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

WWRUG10 - Technical Session Sneak Peak #2 - Customization, Normalization, Localization, and Mobilization

[Phil Bautista]

Here is another sneak peak at four more topics to be covered in the
Technical Session track at the WWRUG10   :

 

Topic

Protecting customizations or extensions across upgrades.

Abstract

AR System applications are highly customizable and flexible.  Upgrading
these customized applications poses some challenges when upgrading to future
versions of BMC products. Come hear what BMC is doing to enforce the use of
best practices when customizing or enhancing BMC Out-Of-The-Box applications
and ensure the preservation of such changes during an upgrade. This topic
will cover the problem, solution and a live demo showcasing the potential
solution.

Synopsis

Topics covered are:

Overview of the problem

Solution

Functionality detail

Demo

 

Topic

Creating Custom Applications to Submit Incidents

Abstract

I have a number of custom forms that submit incidents to the Incident
Management Application. While I do give

them the Incident form in my Help Desk Self Service app, I have also created
separate very specific forms to gather

very specific information for certain applications. We have had trouble
gathering all of the details we need for one

application, another is used to the time it takes to call the Help Desk. I
have another where the issue is always

assigned to SMEs and no work is required byt the Help Desk so I have
automated the assignemnt process. With

these applications I have created drop down menus with the specific
information we need to troubleshoot the

problem. Because of this typing is minimal and it only takes a minute or two
to fill out the information and submit. I

push the data to SRM:Request, the same way that Remedy Requester does so it
looks and acts like a normal

incident once it gets to HPD:Help Desk.

Synopsis

Business Need

1. Incomplete information captured resulting in extra calls to insureds

2. Lack of commitment by user community to call Help Desk for an isolated
problem that is no longer occurring

Benefits

1. All of the information needed to research and resolve the problem is
captured.

2. Menus minimize typing.

3. Links to FAQs and Knowledge documents provide basic technical information
to non-technical people.

4. Can be used 24 x 7.

5. Notifications to Help Desk staff avoid delays in getting problems
resolved.

6. Eliminates need to make a phone call to the Help Desk.

7. Makes handling of issues that require no follow up with the user less
time consuming through automations.

8. Allows those who care visibility into the issues with their application.

The Form

1. Very specific to the application.

2. Only 'must have' information is collected.

3. Fields are hidden until they are needed based on menu selection.

4. Menus are added to fields based on menu selection.

Form Properties - Menu Access:Clear fields,Set defaults

Menus

1. Menus are created from Help Desk categories.

a. Error messages

b. Issues experienced

Hidden Fields needed to push to SRM:Request

 

Topic

Lean Application Design: The effects of normalization

Abstract

Normalized data models and flat data models both have their place in
transactional Remedy applications. Separating

the data model from the data view can have several important implications on
the long term viability of both the

application and the data the application collects.

Synopsis

Knowing the appropriate approach to use when designing custom database
applications can have important

implications on the long term viability of both the application
(performance, reliability, and capabilities) and the data

(quality and integrity) the application collects.

 

Topic

Localize Your AR System Applications using Developer Studio L10n Toolkit

Abstract

Traditionally, localizing custom-built AR System applications has not been
an easy task, because localizable

resources are stored in various formats. Now, Developer Studio provides a
optional plugin that localizes AR System

applications by extracting English terms from AR System objects,
exporting/importing standard localization

interchange formats, and then automatically creating translated resources
and views on the same server.

Synopsis

This session provides an overview of the L10n Toolkit in terms of the
operator user interface and overall processing

model. This includes understanding how the toolkit enables the following
with an integrated user interface:

* processes an application or set of forms on an AR Server to extract the
translatable resources

* allows a translator to work directly within Developer Studio, or export
terms using a standard localization tool

interchange format to be sent to an external translation bureau

* imports translated resources back into the toolkit

* updates the target AR Server with automatically updated views and catalogs

 

Topic

Mobilizing IT: a discussion with Doug Mueller about mobile trends and how to
use smartphones to give your

organization a competitive advantage

Abstract

2010 has been the yea

Re: Customization Management Info

[strauss]

Have you applied any patches to ITSM 7.0.03 yet?  If you have not, doing so 
will uncover every pitfall of customization for you, especially patch 007 and 
earlier.  Try it on a snapshot of production (development or test server) and 
see what gets broken.

When I took my patch 006 system to 007 a couple of years ago, I had to build a 
long checklist of everything that had to be restored or re-customized while 
testing on development, then apply that checklist to production after applying 
the patch.  Patch 008 and 009 (applied together) were a little less damaging, 
but still required building a checklist on dev and executing it on production 
after the patch.  Some tricks helped, like applying the patch on dev, then 
migrating customized fields/forms back from production so that I wasn't 
overwriting any forms (which some of the patches DO).  Then I was able to 
migrate the custom objects back to production from dev after applying the patch 
on prod.  Make darn sure that you re-disable anything you disabled and copied 
to custom workflow; the patch may have re-enabled the original object, AND it 
may have made a change to it that you will need to add to your custom object!

Any attempt to upgrade from 7.0.0x to 7.5.01 or 7.6 will be much worse, as 
whole subsystems were rewritten and some of your integration 
points/customization interfaces will have changed underneath you.  We are 
making the jump to 7.6 from 7.0.03 a migration rather than an upgrade as a 
result, and we only made a limited number of customizations or integrations to 
Incident Management, People, and People Search.  Every customization you make 
to ITSM has the potential to cause difficulty when the next patch comes out, 
and is even more likely to hamper an upgrade.  That said, some customizations 
are essential to meet local requirements.

Christopher Strauss, Ph.D.
Call Tracking Administration Manager
University of North Texas Computing & IT Center
http://itsm.unt.edu/
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Jim Coryat
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:16 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Customization Management Info

**
We are in our 3rd year of using Remedy, we have all the modules implemented 
from the ITSM suite and are finding the customers are wanting customizations 
partly due to our previous system was essentially a custom build.  Part of the 
reason we went to Remedy and ITSM was to get away from the support cost of 
having a custom environment.  Initially we developed our naming standards and 
development standards to follow to ensure consistency in the environment and 
follow the BMC standard for making customizations.  Now that we are a little 
more mature in the product we are wanting to ensure we are still on the right 
track with what we are doing.  If anyone could point to any whitepapers or be 
willing share experiences (good or bad) in the management of customizations we 
would be very interested and trying to glean more information.

Jim Coryat
Micron Technology Inc.
ITIL v2 Practitioner Certified


_Platinum Sponsor: rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Customization Management Info

[Jim Coryat]

We are in our 3rd year of using Remedy, we have all the modules
implemented from the ITSM suite and are finding the customers are
wanting customizations partly due to our previous system was essentially
a custom build.  Part of the reason we went to Remedy and ITSM was to
get away from the support cost of having a custom environment.
Initially we developed our naming standards and development standards to
follow to ensure consistency in the environment and follow the BMC
standard for making customizations.  Now that we are a little more
mature in the product we are wanting to ensure we are still on the right
track with what we are doing.  If anyone could point to any whitepapers
or be willing share experiences (good or bad) in the management of
customizations we would be very interested and trying to glean more
information.

 

Jim Coryat

Micron Technology Inc.

ITIL v2 Practitioner Certified

 

 


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Task Flow Viewer customization

[Charles Baldi]

Does anyone know how to customize the information displayed in the Task Flow
Viewer form?  Specifically the fields which are displayed when you
hover-over a task icon in the flow.  There is a field that displays below
status which we want to hide (because it shows confusing information).
Anyone know where this info/mapping is kept?  Somewhere on the Mid-Tier?

Mid-Tier logs shows the building of the flow but not where the data comes
from.

ARS 7.1 patch 4
Change Management 7.0.3 patch 8

Thanks,
Chuck Baldi

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: AR Error 326 Message Customization - Urgent

[Mahesh Chandra]

One of the conventions that we follow for our custom messages.

*Please fill out the "Field Label"  (ARERR XXXNZZZ).*

Where XXX = Schema Number (usually stored in SYS:Form List in ITSP and
Schema Names in ITSM 7)

   N = 0 for active link, 1 for filter

  ZZZ = Execution Order of the Workflow object (ActiveLink/Filter).

Example from ITSM 7 HelpDesk:
**
*There are no support groups or support group aliases that match the search
criteria ARERR 1290015. *
**
Easy for debugging - message is by active link (0) on execution order "15"
on HPD:HelpDesk (schema ID is 129).

Thanks
Mahesh
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:00 AM, jham36  wrote:

> Your best option is to use an Active Link to throw out your custom
> error message.  I don't think you can customize the system error
> message.
>
> James
>
> On Apr 16, 9:24 am, Meenakshinathan  wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I have some of the fields as a required field in a form. If that
> > fields are null and when i try to push the null values via filter it
> > throws the system error message "Required field cannot be set as NULL
> > 537876345(ARError 326)." I am trying to customize this error message
> > such that, "Please fill the mandatory field 'User Name*'(ARError
> > 326)". I am able to set the string via AR system message catlog. but i
> > could not replace the field database name in the field ID. Have any
> > body customized this error message which replaces the field ID also?
> >
> > I don't want to add any Active Link to check this, using the system
> > error message i want to customize it, please let me know if possible
> > or not.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Meenakshinathan
> >
> >
> ___
> > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org
> > Platinum 
> > Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.netARSlist:
> >  "Where the Answers Are"
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> Platinum 
> Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.netARSlist: 
> "Where the Answers Are"
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: AR Error 326 Message Customization - Urgent

[jham36]

Your best option is to use an Active Link to throw out your custom
error message.  I don't think you can customize the system error
message.

James

On Apr 16, 9:24 am, Meenakshinathan  wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have some of the fields as a required field in a form. If that
> fields are null and when i try to push the null values via filter it
> throws the system error message "Required field cannot be set as NULL
> 537876345(ARError 326)." I am trying to customize this error message
> such that, "Please fill the mandatory field 'User Name*'(ARError
> 326)". I am able to set the string via AR system message catlog. but i
> could not replace the field database name in the field ID. Have any
> body customized this error message which replaces the field ID also?
>
> I don't want to add any Active Link to check this, using the system
> error message i want to customize it, please let me know if possible
> or not.
>
> Thanks,
> Meenakshinathan
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org
> Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

AR Error 326 Message Customization - Urgent

[Meenakshinathan]

Hi All,

I have some of the fields as a required field in a form. If that
fields are null and when i try to push the null values via filter it
throws the system error message "Required field cannot be set as NULL
537876345(ARError 326)." I am trying to customize this error message
such that, "Please fill the mandatory field 'User Name*'(ARError
326)". I am able to set the string via AR system message catlog. but i
could not replace the field database name in the field ID. Have any
body customized this error message which replaces the field ID also?

I don't want to add any Active Link to check this, using the system
error message i want to customize it, please let me know if possible
or not.

Thanks,
Meenakshinathan

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Customization in the Approver Tab of change management

[Louise Van Hine]

The underlying form feeding the Approval tab is relatively straightforward: 
there are a couple of forms, AP:Signature and gets joined to AP:Detail to make 
up the query for the approval table which I believe is called 
AP:Signature-Detail.  I have added things to that tab simply by making a field 
on whichever is the base form holding the data and then added the column to the 
table on the Change form.  Make sure you are adding the same field to the 
correct base form then select it in the join form.  (Sorry i can't be more 
specific here, I only have 7.5 in front of me and the architecture looks 
slightly different.)
 
You may need to perform a lookup for the name using the Login ID in order to 
populate it in the underlying form when the signature record gets created, but 
that is not difficult to do.

--- On Fri, 2/20/09, Saravanan Palaniappan  wrote:

From: Saravanan Palaniappan 
Subject: Customization in the Approver Tab of change management
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Date: Friday, February 20, 2009, 7:07 AM


** 
All,
 
There is a requirement to display the full name in the approver tab of the 
change managemnt console. We tried customizing the workflow 
INT:APRCHG:CSG:SaveNextApprover_RefreshFields_217_Close but that doesn't help 
it out .
 
Any thoughts ? Have any one implemented this before?
 
 
Regards
Sarav..
 
 





This message, including any attachments, contains confidential information 
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is intended for the 
addressee only. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, dissemination, copying, or 
distribution of 
this message or any of its attachments or the information contained in this 
e-mail, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete this message.

__Platinum
 Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___ 




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

Re: Customization in the Approver Tab of change management

[Guillaume Rheault]

In Change Management 7.5, the full name appears instead of the login ID, so you 
may as well upgrade if you can

-Guillaume

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) on behalf of Saravanan 
Palaniappan
Sent: Fri 02/20/09 7:07 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Customization in the Approver Tab of change management
 
All,
 
There is a requirement to display the full name in the approver tab of the 
change managemnt console. We tried customizing the workflow 
INT:APRCHG:CSG:SaveNextApprover_RefreshFields_217_Close but that doesn't help 
it out .
 
Any thoughts ? Have any one implemented this before?
 
 
Regards
Sarav..
 
 



This message, including any attachments, contains confidential information 
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is intended for the 
addressee only. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, dissemination, copying, or 
distribution of 
this message or any of its attachments or the information contained in this 
e-mail, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete this message.



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


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

Customization in the Approver Tab of change management

[Saravanan Palaniappan]

All,
 
There is a requirement to display the full name in the approver tab of the 
change managemnt console. We tried customizing the workflow 
INT:APRCHG:CSG:SaveNextApprover_RefreshFields_217_Close but that doesn't help 
it out .
 
Any thoughts ? Have any one implemented this before?
 
 
Regards
Sarav..
 
 



This message, including any attachments, contains confidential information 
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is intended for the 
addressee only. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, dissemination, copying, or 
distribution of 
this message or any of its attachments or the information contained in this 
e-mail, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete this message.



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

Re: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

[Rosemary]

I had this issue as well, even with the customisation guide that comes with
the full version - you will need to have something like Frontpage or
Dreamweaver if you don't want to make modifications at a code level.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Bilinski, John wrote:

> David thank you.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Easter, David
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:26 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>  Subject: Re: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions
>
> I spoke briefly with someone on the SMPM team and they said that the
> trial executable cannot be customized. The licensed SMPM product comes
> with a customization manual.  Minimal HTML and Microsoft Visio skills
> are needed to customize the licensed Service Management Process Model.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>
> -David J. Easter
> Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development
> BMC Software, Inc.
>
> The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed
> in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc.
> My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a
> role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for
> BMC Software, Inc.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Bilinski, John
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 4:31 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions
>
> All,
>
> We just purchased and installed the SMPM for Service Support and Service
> Delivery application for the ITSM Suite 7.1. I was under the impression
> that there was a GUI that could easily be used to update or modify the
> dynamic process flows contained within the web pages of the application.
> For example, the incident mgt process does not completely fit our
> processes and my customer wants to update the flow chart to add an extra
> step. So far I cannot find an executable for a GUI to do this. It seems
> to me that the process webpage's are static and cannot be modified even
> though BMC told me they could it looks like I have to go deep in to the
> JavaScript files to get this stuff to work. Of course, I have not
> lessened the application with our production license I am only using the
> trial for testing.
>
> Does anyone know if there is a GUI that can be used to update the
> webpage's in a more easy fashion then going down to the script level to
> make customizations?
>
> Thanks.
>
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum
> Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
>
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
>
>
> ___
>  UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
>

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

Re: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

[Bilinski, John]

David thank you. 

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Easter, David
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:26 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

I spoke briefly with someone on the SMPM team and they said that the
trial executable cannot be customized. The licensed SMPM product comes
with a customization manual.  Minimal HTML and Microsoft Visio skills
are needed to customize the licensed Service Management Process Model.

Hope this helps. 

 
-David J. Easter
Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development
BMC Software, Inc.
 
The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed
in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc.
My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a
role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for
BMC Software, Inc.
 

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Bilinski, John
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 4:31 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

All,

We just purchased and installed the SMPM for Service Support and Service
Delivery application for the ITSM Suite 7.1. I was under the impression
that there was a GUI that could easily be used to update or modify the
dynamic process flows contained within the web pages of the application.
For example, the incident mgt process does not completely fit our
processes and my customer wants to update the flow chart to add an extra
step. So far I cannot find an executable for a GUI to do this. It seems
to me that the process webpage's are static and cannot be modified even
though BMC told me they could it looks like I have to go deep in to the
JavaScript files to get this stuff to work. Of course, I have not
lessened the application with our production license I am only using the
trial for testing.

Does anyone know if there is a GUI that can be used to update the
webpage's in a more easy fashion then going down to the script level to
make customizations?

Thanks.


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


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

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

Re: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

[Easter, David]

I spoke briefly with someone on the SMPM team and they said that the
trial executable cannot be customized. The licensed SMPM product comes
with a customization manual.  Minimal HTML and Microsoft Visio skills
are needed to customize the licensed Service Management Process Model.

Hope this helps. 

 
-David J. Easter
Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development
BMC Software, Inc.
 
The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed
in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc.
My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a
role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for
BMC Software, Inc.
 

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Bilinski, John
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 4:31 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

All,

We just purchased and installed the SMPM for Service Support and Service
Delivery application for the ITSM Suite 7.1. I was under the impression
that there was a GUI that could easily be used to update or modify the
dynamic process flows contained within the web pages of the application.
For example, the incident mgt process does not completely fit our
processes and my customer wants to update the flow chart to add an extra
step. So far I cannot find an executable for a GUI to do this. It seems
to me that the process webpage's are static and cannot be modified even
though BMC told me they could it looks like I have to go deep in to the
JavaScript files to get this stuff to work. Of course, I have not
lessened the application with our production license I am only using the
trial for testing.

Does anyone know if there is a GUI that can be used to update the
webpage's in a more easy fashion then going down to the script level to
make customizations?

Thanks.


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

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

SMPM 7.1 for ITSM 7.1 customization questions

[Bilinski, John]

All,

We just purchased and installed the SMPM for Service Support and Service
Delivery application for the ITSM Suite 7.1. I was under the impression
that there was a GUI that could easily be used to update or modify the
dynamic process flows contained within the web pages of the application.
For example, the incident mgt process does not completely fit our
processes and my customer wants to update the flow chart to add an extra
step. So far I cannot find an executable for a GUI to do this. It seems
to me that the process webpage's are static and cannot be modified even
though BMC told me they could it looks like I have to go deep in to the
JavaScript files to get this stuff to work. Of course, I have not
lessened the application with our production license I am only using the
trial for testing.

Does anyone know if there is a GUI that can be used to update the
webpage's in a more easy fashion then going down to the script level to
make customizations?

Thanks.

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

Re: ITSM 7: Multitenancy, Permissions, Roles. Need OOB info and customization ideas

[Rabi Tripathi]

Christopher,
Wow, you guys have done a lot of work on this. I can
imagine the efforts that went into analyzing and
documenting the details.

I quickly looked at a few things, and I can see you
have a lot of useful info. Thank you for the link.

The main issue I see (with BMC's documentation) is
that a lot of the information (but not all) is there
in bits and pieces all over the place. BMC never puts
it together in a place for you to understand the big
picture in full and to get an understanding of
implications of various choices.

I see that with great diagrams etc you have tried to
accomplish exactly that. I will be going back to your
site a lot. I am guessing that your advanced training
(PhD) may have pushed you towards ripping this beast
apart to understand it and fully utilize it, rather
than confining yourself and your implementation to the
limited understanding that BMC offers in its doc. :)

Thanks again. I will share with you anything useful I
may come across at my end.


--- strauss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> You are welcome to study all of the multi-tenancy
> docs that we have put
> online so far, as we continue to refine our
> customizations to IM to get
> it to work the way we need it to.  All of the
> multi-tenancy docs and the
> new permissions write-up I "finished" today are at
> http://arsweb4.ars.unt.edu/index_prod.htm in the
> section titled
> "UNT-Specific Documentation for Multi-Tenancy in the
> UNT BMC Remedy ITSM
> 7.x system." We are still trying to beat some of the
> cross-company
> assignment problems into submission. There is even a
> new explanation of
> our initial implementation of SLM 7.1, which is
> almost as much fun to
> work with as multi-tenancy.  In fact, it has to work
> very differently in
> a multi-tenancy environment, and we expect it to
> evolve a lot over the
> coming year as we learn more about it.
> 
> Let me know if got any of the concepts wrong - they
> are so well
> documented (NOT), and some of my reverse-engineering
> efforts have been
> superficial due to lack of time/resources that were
> instead spent fixing
> bugs in the OOTB app that never should have left the
> developers'
> workstations. I must admit that we have had trouble
> understanding some
> of the implications of our multi-tenancy model until
> real users started
> trying to do real work, and found that they could
> not. We didn't realize
> just how shallow the multi-tenancy capabilities of
> the OOTB app really
> are until we got it into production.
> 
> Christopher Strauss, Ph.D.
> Call Tracking Administration Manager
> University of North Texas Computing & IT Center
> http://itsm.unt.edu/
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion
> list(ARSList)
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rabi
> Tripathi
> > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 10:58 PM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: ITSM 7: Multitenancy, Permissions, Roles.
> Need OOB info and
> > customization ideas
> > 
> > Hi folks,
> > I am looking at extending the ITSM 7's scheme for
> data
> > and rules partitioning (in other words,
> permissions)
> > to satisfy a customer's requirements.
> > 
> > I am looking for info on ITSM 7's OOB capabilities
> as
> > well ideas for modifications/enhancements.
> > 
> > I need to enhance the per company scheme of
> setting
> > data access permissions to take it to business
> units
> > within companies.
> > 
> > I also need to enhance specification and
> maintenance
> > of access rules for data to be more granular and
> less
> > onerous at the same time.
> > 
> > The main gaps between what customer needs and
> what's
> > in ITSM 7 are:
> > (1)multi-tenancy goes only so far. If a company is
> > supporting many other companies, business units
> within
> > those companies can not be segregated for data
> access
> > etc. In the customer's world, per company is not
> > specific enough.
> > 
> > (2)if you use recommended solution of having
> business
> > units themselves defined as companies, it gets
> > awkward, for the simple reason that this is a
> > workaround, not a good solution.  Bob Backline may
> > need access to 10 BUs within a company and 20 in
> > another. Who's going to maintain his and his
> > colleagues access list. He can't see their tickets
> > together in his console.
> > Plenty of other issues, such as reports etc. It
> will
> > be harder to do anything to a company as a whole.
> > 
> > (3)Company access can be specified at people

Re: ITSM 7: Multitenancy, Permissions, Roles. Need OOB info and customization ideas

[strauss]

You are welcome to study all of the multi-tenancy docs that we have put
online so far, as we continue to refine our customizations to IM to get
it to work the way we need it to.  All of the multi-tenancy docs and the
new permissions write-up I "finished" today are at
http://arsweb4.ars.unt.edu/index_prod.htm in the section titled
"UNT-Specific Documentation for Multi-Tenancy in the UNT BMC Remedy ITSM
7.x system." We are still trying to beat some of the cross-company
assignment problems into submission. There is even a new explanation of
our initial implementation of SLM 7.1, which is almost as much fun to
work with as multi-tenancy.  In fact, it has to work very differently in
a multi-tenancy environment, and we expect it to evolve a lot over the
coming year as we learn more about it.

Let me know if got any of the concepts wrong - they are so well
documented (NOT), and some of my reverse-engineering efforts have been
superficial due to lack of time/resources that were instead spent fixing
bugs in the OOTB app that never should have left the developers'
workstations. I must admit that we have had trouble understanding some
of the implications of our multi-tenancy model until real users started
trying to do real work, and found that they could not. We didn't realize
just how shallow the multi-tenancy capabilities of the OOTB app really
are until we got it into production.

Christopher Strauss, Ph.D.
Call Tracking Administration Manager
University of North Texas Computing & IT Center
http://itsm.unt.edu/

> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rabi Tripathi
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 10:58 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: ITSM 7: Multitenancy, Permissions, Roles. Need OOB info and
> customization ideas
> 
> Hi folks,
> I am looking at extending the ITSM 7's scheme for data
> and rules partitioning (in other words, permissions)
> to satisfy a customer's requirements.
> 
> I am looking for info on ITSM 7's OOB capabilities as
> well ideas for modifications/enhancements.
> 
> I need to enhance the per company scheme of setting
> data access permissions to take it to business units
> within companies.
> 
> I also need to enhance specification and maintenance
> of access rules for data to be more granular and less
> onerous at the same time.
> 
> The main gaps between what customer needs and what's
> in ITSM 7 are:
> (1)multi-tenancy goes only so far. If a company is
> supporting many other companies, business units within
> those companies can not be segregated for data access
> etc. In the customer's world, per company is not
> specific enough.
> 
> (2)if you use recommended solution of having business
> units themselves defined as companies, it gets
> awkward, for the simple reason that this is a
> workaround, not a good solution.  Bob Backline may
> need access to 10 BUs within a company and 20 in
> another. Who's going to maintain his and his
> colleagues access list. He can't see their tickets
> together in his console.
> Plenty of other issues, such as reports etc. It will
> be harder to do anything to a company as a whole.
> 
> (3)Company access can be specified at people level,
> not group/organization level.
> 
> (4)Documentation issue--whatever capabilities ITSM has
> for data/rules partitioning is not explained in full
> anywhere . (see my list as to what I have seen so far)
> 
> 
> So, I am looking for anything that will help me
> fully understand OOB capabilities*** And any ideas on
> customization to further enhance how tenancy, roles
> etc can better segregate data and allow better control
> of access to system's features. Ok, I am being rather
> vague here...but if not fresh ideas from your mind
> just for my purpose...I'm at least looking for
> anything that somebody has already done in these
> areas.
> 
> To understand OOB, I have so far looked at:
> -the "guide to multitenancy" pdf doc from BMC
> -the docs from advanced ITSM 7 trainings for partners,
> especially the "core" training, volume 2
> -of course the regular pdf manuals, especially the
> config guide and user guide
> -ITSM 7 architecture pdf document
> 
> ..and yes I still think the *full* picture of OOB
> capability does not emerge, especially how tenancy,
> app permissions, roles etc intersect or work
> together...at least not in a way this mortal feels
> satisfied. Not if a way I can fully explain it to my
> customer.
> 
> I may have just gotten old compared to last year, but
> I find it convenient to deny and ignore this development.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

ITSM 7: Multitenancy, Permissions, Roles. Need OOB info and customization ideas

[Rabi Tripathi]

Hi folks,
I am looking at extending the ITSM 7's scheme for data
and rules partitioning (in other words, permissions)
to satisfy a customer's requirements. 

I am looking for info on ITSM 7's OOB capabilities as
well ideas for modifications/enhancements.

I need to enhance the per company scheme of setting
data access permissions to take it to business units
within companies.

I also need to enhance specification and maintenance
of access rules for data to be more granular and less
onerous at the same time.

The main gaps between what customer needs and what's
in ITSM 7 are:
(1)multi-tenancy goes only so far. If a company is
supporting many other companies, business units within
those companies can not be segregated for data access
etc. In the customer's world, per company is not
specific enough.

(2)if you use recommended solution of having business
units themselves defined as companies, it gets
awkward, for the simple reason that this is a
workaround, not a good solution.  Bob Backline may
need access to 10 BUs within a company and 20 in
another. Who's going to maintain his and his
colleagues access list. He can't see their tickets
together in his console. 
Plenty of other issues, such as reports etc. It will
be harder to do anything to a company as a whole.

(3)Company access can be specified at people level,
not group/organization level.

(4)Documentation issue--whatever capabilities ITSM has
for data/rules partitioning is not explained in full
anywhere . (see my list as to what I have seen so far)


So, I am looking for anything that will help me
fully understand OOB capabilities*** And any ideas on
customization to further enhance how tenancy, roles
etc can better segregate data and allow better control
of access to system's features. Ok, I am being rather
vague here...but if not fresh ideas from your mind
just for my purpose...I'm at least looking for
anything that somebody has already done in these
areas.

To understand OOB, I have so far looked at:
-the "guide to multitenancy" pdf doc from BMC
-the docs from advanced ITSM 7 trainings for partners,
especially the "core" training, volume 2
-of course the regular pdf manuals, especially the
config guide and user guide
-ITSM 7 architecture pdf document

..and yes I still think the *full* picture of OOB
capability does not emerge, especially how tenancy,
app permissions, roles etc intersect or work
together...at least not in a way this mortal feels
satisfied. Not if a way I can fully explain it to my
customer. 

I may have just gotten old compared to last year, but
I find it convenient to deny and ignore this development.


  

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Re: Incident Console customization

[T. Dee]

If you double click on the field in the table that you added - what
are the permissions - should be general access and public.

Ty


On 4/8/08, Pease, Franci E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> **
>
>
> My users have requested Next Target Date field be added to the Support view
> of Incident Management Console.
>
>
>
> I edited the tablefield view by moving the field over, however only someone
> with Incident Management permissions can view the field on the console.
>
>
>
> Anyone know how to make this visible to Incident Users?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Franci__Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
> html___

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"

Incident Console customization

[Pease, Franci E]

My users have requested Next Target Date field be added to the Support
view of Incident Management Console.

 

I edited the tablefield view by moving the field over, however only
someone with Incident Management permissions can view the field on the
console.

 

Anyone know how to make this visible to Incident Users?

 

Thanks!

Franci


___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"