Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Since I have taken up writing a document regarding ‘good practices’ around 
development methods, which envelops the idea of adopting a convention on field 
ID’s I have got a few wheels spinning before I bring thought onto a formal 
document..

Adopting such conventions could mean projects where you do a ‘cleanup’. Meaning 
if these standards were not approached from day 1 and now you are on day n 
since the time the the ARS invaded your IT shop, going through a process of a 
smooth cleanup..

The archgid should help in most cases.. This until you notice that some of your 
AIE jobs, SLM rules, CMDB customizations were a part of those change field ID 
efforts..

I would like to hear about first hand experiences from those who have been 
impacted after the use of archgid in these specific areas. If there are other 
areas that you were affected and would like to share your experiences, please 
feel free to share your experiences either here or directly to me at my email.

I am not so worried about web services, as such a cleanup would break web 
services too but it would only be a matter of redo your Mid-Tier cache and let 
consumers of your web services know what has changed in case they start 
experiencing some problems..

Joe

From: Matt Laurenceau 
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 7:53 AM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** John, (and all) 

Your thread enabled a lot of great things:
  a.. You won the longest thread Award during WWRUG (congrats! :) 
  b.. A couple of people have been working on documenting Field ID Best 
Practices (already viewed 1300 times, Shyam currently leads this project) 
  c.. Last week, during WWRUG, this idea grew into a bigger Community 
Development Best Practices initiative, very exciting! 
Anders, Joe, Misi, Carl, Shyam (and perhaps other I missed) have already 
contributed. Thanks a lot!
By collaboratively documenting things, the whole Community is making great 
progress (proactively enabling tens of thousands of Remedy Admins worldwide :-)

John, thanks a million for triggering this!


What are the hottest topics to document ?
Anything you'd like to write based on your experience ?


Take care,




~ Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software

Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities

Follow me @Matt_L

Google Profiles, Skype: matt.laurenceau


On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Matt Laurenceau  
wrote:

  Thanks a bunch Jason, adding your ideas as a comment directly on the DN Doc.


  I meet with Vijai in 6 hours, you'll see progress directly on DN (if you set 
Receive Email Notification on the AR Community - bottom-right Actions panel, 
below the very busy WWRUG feed ;-)

  Matt
  Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities

  BMC Software, matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com

  Follow me @Matt_L

  Skype: matt.laurenceau




  On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jason Miller  wrote:

** 
A few comments:
#3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used on 
multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last Name, 
Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some are not so 
obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some forms/apps 
that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than I thought 
they ever would.

For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it 
specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared element 
somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?

#1 In the NOT section:
I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have 
seen some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID however 
as time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the context of 
sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty meaningless.  I also 
agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I have mentioned on the 
List before that I like to put "Created" in Change History field of workflow, 
fields and forms.  That  captures who and also the create date, which is not 
capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy form for tracking objects as you 
build/change them that gives us the who, when and the Change Request ID to 
provide a reference back to the business reason for the change (the plan is to 
integrated it with AR System Version Control: Object Modification Log to 
automate some).  This form and a Crystal Reports also gives us the manifest for 
changes that need to be moved to live. 

Jason 



On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L  
wrote:

  ** 
  Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.



  Before we begin develop a standard, let’s address questions regarding the 
relevance of data to be captured in the database id.



  Assumptions

  Given the range of databas

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we change the subject line now???

[Matt Laurenceau]

Thanks Fred !
Managing these IDs in a form that every developer uses is indeed one of the
most efficient best practice.

As Jason proposed, would you mind sharing DEF on
https://communities.bmc.com/communities/community/bmcdn/bmc_atrium_and_foundation_technologies/bmc_remedy_ar_system?view=documents?


~ Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com
Follow me at @Matt_L <https://twitter.com/matt_L>
Skype: matt.laurenceau

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Jason Miller wrote:

> **
>
> Can you share the format/scheme?
> On Sep 13, 2011 8:41 AM, "Grooms, Frederick W" 
> wrote:
> > We have a Field ID development form that we use to generate the Field
> ID(s) to use. We have used this approach for at least 10 years.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Sanford, Claire
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 9:58 AM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we
> change the subject line now???
> >
> > **
> > Since we are in a way outside of the original thread, could we please
> change the subject line?  Maybe even give this new type of discussion a
> header.  Makes it easier to sort the actual problems from the interesting
> development discussion.
> >
> > My Comment on the field ID would be to leave it as a number range.
> Adding letters and such makes it harder to manage in many ways.  I develop
> in the 9XX (however many zeros) range.  So, I just search for that.
> I have consultants that are doing some work.  I asked them to use the
> 8 range.  This way we all know if I did the work (or someone else
> internal) or if a consultant did the work.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:37 AM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> > ** Thanks a bunch Jason, adding your ideas as a comment directly on the
> DN Doc.
> > I meet with Vijai in 6 hours, you'll see progress directly on DN (if you
> set Receive Email Notification on the AR Community - bottom-right Actions
> panel, below the very busy WWRUG feed ;-)
> >
> > Matt
> > Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> > BMC Software, matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com
> > Follow me @Matt_L
> > Skype: matt.laurenceau
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jason Miller 
> wrote:
> > **
> > A few comments:
> > #3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used
> on multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last
> Name, Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some
> are not so obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some
> forms/apps that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than
> I thought they ever would.
> >
> > For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it
> specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared
> element somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?
> >
> > #1 In the NOT section:
> > I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have
> seen some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID
> however as time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the
> context of sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty
> meaningless.  I also agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I
> have mentioned on the List before that I like to put "Created" in Change
> History field of workflow, fields and forms.  That  captures who and also
> the create date, which is not capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy
> form for tracking objects as you build/change them that gives us the who,
> when and the Change Request ID to provide a reference back to the business
> reason for the change (the plan is to integrated it with AR System Version
> Control: Object Modification Log to automate some).  This form and a Crystal
> Reports also gives us the manifest for changes that need to be moved to
> live.
> >
> > Jason
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L <
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov> wrote:
> > **
> > Thank you for starting th

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we change the subject line now???

[Jason Miller]

Can you share the format/scheme?
On Sep 13, 2011 8:41 AM, "Grooms, Frederick W" 
wrote:
> We have a Field ID development form that we use to generate the Field
ID(s) to use. We have used this approach for at least 10 years.
>
> Fred
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Sanford, Claire
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 9:58 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we
change the subject line now???
>
> **
> Since we are in a way outside of the original thread, could we please
change the subject line?  Maybe even give this new type of discussion a
header.  Makes it easier to sort the actual problems from the interesting
development discussion.
>
> My Comment on the field ID would be to leave it as a number range.  Adding
letters and such makes it harder to manage in many ways.  I develop in the
9XX (however many zeros) range.  So, I just search for that.  I have
consultants that are doing some work.  I asked them to use the 8
range.  This way we all know if I did the work (or someone else internal) or
if a consultant did the work.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:37 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> ** Thanks a bunch Jason, adding your ideas as a comment directly on the DN
Doc.
> I meet with Vijai in 6 hours, you'll see progress directly on DN (if you
set Receive Email Notification on the AR Community - bottom-right Actions
panel, below the very busy WWRUG feed ;-)
>
> Matt
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> BMC Software, matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com
> Follow me @Matt_L
> Skype: matt.laurenceau
>
>
> -Original Message-
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jason Miller 
wrote:
> **
> A few comments:
> #3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used on
multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last Name,
Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some are not
so obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some
forms/apps that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than
I thought they ever would.
>
> For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it
specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared
element somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?
>
> #1 In the NOT section:
> I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have
seen some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID
however as time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the
context of sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty
meaningless.  I also agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I
have mentioned on the List before that I like to put "Created" in Change
History field of workflow, fields and forms.  That  captures who and also
the create date, which is not capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy
form for tracking objects as you build/change them that gives us the who,
when and the Change Request ID to provide a reference back to the business
reason for the change (the plan is to integrated it with AR System Version
Control: Object Modification Log to automate some).  This form and a Crystal
Reports also gives us the manifest for changes that need to be moved to
live.
>
> Jason
>
>
> -Original Message-
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
wrote:
> **
> Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.
>
> Before we begin develop a standard, let's address questions regarding the
relevance of data to be captured in the database id.
>
> Assumptions
> Given the range of database ids is 600,000,000 to 999,999,999:
> The first digit may contain the numerals 6-9.
> The other 8 digits may contain numerals 0-9.
> 2-3 digits should be allowed for sequential numbering.  They are relevant
to the form, other fields on the form, and duplication across forms.
>
> What data do we want to convey?  I think these are the most important
pieces of data, but I might be wrong.
> 1.  Application (Asset, Request Mgt, Change, Archive, Custom)
> 2.  Field Usage (i.e. a zTmp field has vastly different usage than a
Request ID field.  Some forms can hold 3 or 4 Request IDs, and they ought to
be noted.)
> 3.  Is it useful to denote fields used on multiple forms?
>
> What data do we NOT want to preserve?
> 1.  I don't believe that the creator of th

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we change the subject line now???

[Grooms, Frederick W]

We have a Field ID development form that we use to generate the Field ID(s) to 
use.  We have used this approach for at least 10 years.

Fred

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Sanford, Claire
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 9:58 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we change 
the subject line now???

** 
Since we are in a way outside of the original thread, could we please change 
the subject line?  Maybe even give this new type of discussion a header.  Makes 
it easier to sort the actual problems from the interesting development 
discussion.
 
My Comment on the field ID would be to leave it as a number range.  Adding 
letters and such makes it harder to manage in many ways.  I develop in the 
9XX (however many zeros) range.  So, I just search for that.  I have 
consultants that are doing some work.  I asked them to use the 8 
range.  This way we all know if I did the work (or someone else internal) or if 
a consultant did the work.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:37 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
** Thanks a bunch Jason, adding your ideas as a comment directly on the DN Doc.
I meet with Vijai in 6 hours, you'll see progress directly on DN (if you set 
Receive Email Notification on the AR Community - bottom-right Actions panel, 
below the very busy WWRUG feed ;-)

Matt
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
BMC Software, matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com
Follow me @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau


-Original Message-
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jason Miller  wrote:
** 
A few comments:
#3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used on 
multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last Name, 
Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some are not so 
obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some forms/apps 
that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than I thought 
they ever would.

For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it 
specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared element 
somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?

#1 In the NOT section:
I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have seen 
some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID however as 
time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the context of 
sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty meaningless.  I also 
agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I have mentioned on the 
List before that I like to put "Created" in Change History field of workflow, 
fields and forms.  That  captures who and also the create date, which is not 
capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy form for tracking objects as you 
build/change them that gives us the who, when and the Change Request ID to 
provide a reference back to the business reason for the change (the plan is to 
integrated it with AR System Version Control: Object Modification Log to 
automate some).  This form and a Crystal Reports also gives us the manifest for 
changes that need to be moved to live. 

Jason 


-Original Message-
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L  
wrote:
** 
Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.
 
Before we begin develop a standard, let's address questions regarding the 
relevance of data to be captured in the database id.
 
Assumptions
Given the range of database ids is 600,000,000 to 999,999,999:
The first digit may contain the numerals 6-9.
The other 8 digits may contain numerals 0-9.
2-3 digits should be allowed for sequential numbering.  They are relevant to 
the form, other fields on the form, and duplication across forms.
 
What data do we want to convey?  I think these are the most important pieces of 
data, but I might be wrong.
1.  Application (Asset, Request Mgt, Change, Archive, Custom)
2.  Field Usage (i.e. a zTmp field has vastly different usage than a 
Request ID field.  Some forms can hold 3 or 4 Request IDs, and they ought to be 
noted.)
3.  Is it useful to denote fields used on multiple forms?
 
What data do we NOT want to preserve?
1.  I don't believe that the creator of the information is particularly 
important for shared files.  Do we want to waste precious digits when authoring 
rights can be captured in Help Text or Change Log?
2.  Same for Field Type.  That data is included in the definition file.  I 
don't care whether it's a character field or an enumerated field, but I'd like 
to know t

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? - Can we change the subject line now???

[Sanford, Claire]

Since we are in a way outside of the original thread, could we please change 
the subject line?  Maybe even give this new type of discussion a header.  Makes 
it easier to sort the actual problems from the interesting development 
discussion.

My Comment on the field ID would be to leave it as a number range.  Adding 
letters and such makes it harder to manage in many ways.  I develop in the 
9XX (however many zeros) range.  So, I just search for that.  I have 
consultants that are doing some work.  I asked them to use the 8 range. 
 This way we all know if I did the work (or someone else internal) or if a 
consultant did the work.


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:37 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** Thanks a bunch Jason, adding your ideas as a comment directly on the DN 
Doc<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-16743>.

I meet with Vijai in 6 hours, you'll see progress directly on DN (if you set 
Receive Email Notification on the AR 
Community<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/community/bmcdn/bmc_atrium_and_foundation_technologies/bmc_remedy_ar_system?view=overview>
 - bottom-right Actions panel, below the very busy WWRUG feed ;-)

Matt
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
BMC Software, matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com<mailto:matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com>
Follow me @Matt_L<https://twitter.com/matt_L>
Skype: matt.laurenceau



On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jason Miller 
mailto:jason.mil...@gmail.com>> wrote:
**
A few comments:
#3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used on 
multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last Name, 
Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some are not so 
obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some forms/apps 
that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than I thought 
they ever would.

For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it 
specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared element 
somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?

#1 In the NOT section:
I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have seen 
some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID however as 
time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the context of 
sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty meaningless.  I also 
agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I have mentioned on the 
List before that I like to put "Created" in Change History field of workflow, 
fields and forms.  That  captures who and also the create date, which is not 
capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy form for tracking objects as you 
build/change them that gives us the who, when and the Change Request ID to 
provide a reference back to the business reason for the change (the plan is to 
integrated it with AR System Version Control: Object Modification Log to 
automate some).  This form and a Crystal Reports also gives us the manifest for 
changes that need to be moved to live.

Jason



On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>> wrote:
**
Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.

Before we begin develop a standard, let's address questions regarding the 
relevance of data to be captured in the database id.

Assumptions
Given the range of database ids is 600,000,000 to 999,999,999:
The first digit may contain the numerals 6-9.
The other 8 digits may contain numerals 0-9.
2-3 digits should be allowed for sequential numbering.  They are relevant to 
the form, other fields on the form, and duplication across forms.

What data do we want to convey?  I think these are the most important pieces of 
data, but I might be wrong.

1.  Application (Asset, Request Mgt, Change, Archive, Custom)

2.  Field Usage (i.e. a zTmp field has vastly different usage than a 
Request ID field.  Some forms can hold 3 or 4 Request IDs, and they ought to be 
noted.)

3.  Is it useful to denote fields used on multiple forms?

What data do we NOT want to preserve?

1.  I don't believe that the creator of the information is particularly 
important for shared files.  Do we want to waste precious digits when authoring 
rights can be captured in Help Text or Change Log?

2.  Same for Field Type.  That data is included in the definition file.  I 
don't care whether it's a character field or an enumerated field, but I'd like 
to know the impact of changing the field.

How are we able to convey that information?
How do we want to organize the information in our allotted 9 digits?

Jennifer Meyer
R

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Thanks a bunch Jason, adding your ideas as a comment directly on the
DN Doc<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-16743>
.

I meet with Vijai in 6 hours, you'll see progress directly on DN (if you set
*Receive Email Notification* on the AR
Community<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/community/bmcdn/bmc_atrium_and_foundation_technologies/bmc_remedy_ar_system?view=overview>-
bottom-right Actions panel, below the
*very busy* WWRUG feed ;-)

Matt

Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities

BMC Software, matthieu_laurenc...@bmc.com

Follow me @Matt_L <https://twitter.com/matt_L>

Skype: matt.laurenceau



On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jason Miller wrote:

> **
> A few comments:
> #3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used on
> multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last Name,
> Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some are not
> so obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some
> forms/apps that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than
> I thought they ever would.
>
> For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it
> specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared
> element somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?
>
> #1 In the NOT section:
> I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have
> seen some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID
> however as time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the
> context of sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty
> meaningless.  I also agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I
> have mentioned on the List before that I like to put "Created" in Change
> History field of workflow, fields and forms.  That  captures who and also
> the create date, which is not capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy
> form for tracking objects as you build/change them that gives us the who,
> when and the Change Request ID to provide a reference back to the business
> reason for the change (the plan is to integrated it with AR System Version
> Control: Object Modification Log to automate some).  This form and a Crystal
> Reports also gives us the manifest for changes that need to be moved to
> live.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>> Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Before we begin develop a standard, let’s address questions regarding the
>> relevance of data to be captured in the database id.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Assumptions
>>
>> Given the range of database ids is 600,000,000 to 999,999,999:
>>
>> The first digit may contain the numerals 6-9.
>>
>> The other 8 digits may contain numerals 0-9.
>>
>> 2-3 digits should be allowed for sequential numbering.  They are relevant
>> to the form, other fields on the form, and duplication across forms.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> What data do we want to convey?  I think these are the most important
>> pieces of data, but I might be wrong.
>>
>> **1.  **Application (Asset, Request Mgt, Change, Archive, Custom)
>>
>> **2.  **Field Usage (i.e. a zTmp field has vastly different usage
>> than a Request ID field.  Some forms can hold 3 or 4 Request IDs, and they
>> ought to be noted.)
>>
>> **3.  **Is it useful to denote fields used on multiple forms?
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> What data do we NOT want to preserve?
>>
>> **1.  **I don’t believe that the creator of the information is
>> particularly important for shared files.  Do we want to waste precious
>> digits when authoring rights can be captured in Help Text or Change Log?*
>> ***
>>
>> **2.  **Same for Field Type.  That data is included in the definition
>> file.  I don’t care whether it’s a character field or an enumerated field,
>> but I’d like to know the impact of changing the field.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> How are we able to convey that information?
>>
>> How do we want to organize the information in our allotted 9 digits?
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Jennifer Meyer
>>
>> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
>>
>> State of North Carolina
>>
>> Office of Information Technology Services 
>>
>> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
>>
>> Office: 919-754-6543****
>>
>> ITS Service D

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

A few comments:
#3 One of the gotchas is many times you don't know a field will be used on
multiple forms when you first create it.  Some like First Name, Last Name,
Requester Phone, etc will most likely be used on many forms but some are not
so obvious when you start creating a form/application.  I have some
forms/apps that were quick solutions that kept growing and lived longer than
I thought they ever would.

For things like First Name, Last Name, etc, how would we indicate that it
specific to one application (#1)?  Do we indicate that it is a shared
element somehow (foundation if you will) not specific to one application?

#1 In the NOT section:
I agree it is not too important to track who created the field.  I have seen
some of the conventions that capture the creator in the field ID however as
time goes on is it really that important who created it?  In the context of
sharing applications in the community I think it is pretty meaningless.  I
also agree there are other ways to track this if needed.  I have mentioned
on the List before that I like to put "Created" in Change History field of
workflow, fields and forms.  That  captures who and also the create date,
which is not capture anywhere.  However we have a Remedy form for tracking
objects as you build/change them that gives us the who, when and the Change
Request ID to provide a reference back to the business reason for the change
(the plan is to integrated it with AR System Version Control: Object
Modification Log to automate some).  This form and a Crystal Reports also
gives us the manifest for changes that need to be moved to live.

Jason


On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L wrote:

> **
>
> Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.
>
> ** **
>
> Before we begin develop a standard, let’s address questions regarding the
> relevance of data to be captured in the database id.
>
> ** **
>
> Assumptions
>
> Given the range of database ids is 600,000,000 to 999,999,999:
>
> The first digit may contain the numerals 6-9.
>
> The other 8 digits may contain numerals 0-9.
>
> 2-3 digits should be allowed for sequential numbering.  They are relevant
> to the form, other fields on the form, and duplication across forms.
>
> ** **
>
> What data do we want to convey?  I think these are the most important
> pieces of data, but I might be wrong.
>
> **1.  **Application (Asset, Request Mgt, Change, Archive, Custom)
>
> **2.  **Field Usage (i.e. a zTmp field has vastly different usage than
> a Request ID field.  Some forms can hold 3 or 4 Request IDs, and they ought
> to be noted.)
>
> **3.  **Is it useful to denote fields used on multiple forms?
>
> ** **
>
> What data do we NOT want to preserve?
>
> **1.  **I don’t believe that the creator of the information is
> particularly important for shared files.  Do we want to waste precious
> digits when authoring rights can be captured in Help Text or Change Log?**
> **
>
> **2.  **Same for Field Type.  That data is included in the definition
> file.  I don’t care whether it’s a character field or an enumerated field,
> but I’d like to know the impact of changing the field.
>
> ** **
>
> How are we able to convey that information?
>
> How do we want to organize the information in our allotted 9 digits?
>
> ** **
>
> Jennifer Meyer
>
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
>
> State of North Carolina
>
> Office of Information Technology Services 
>
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
>
> Office: 919-754-6543
>
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
>
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
>
> http://its.state.nc.us
>
> ** **
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
> authorized State Official.****
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Matt Laurenceau
> *Sent:* Monday, September 12, 2011 6:03 AM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>  ** **
>
> ** I have commitment from a manager in BMC Engineering to share ideas (he
> actually proposed his help while looking at ARSList - great!)
>
> ** **
>
> I have drafted something to begin 
> with<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-16743>
> .
>
> Please check it out, and share your thoughts.
>
>- Add a *Comment *if you want to send a heads-up
>- *Edit* the Doc directly (yes, wikipedia-style), should you be able to
>make things prog

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Thanks Jason, I sure saw that!
With crowdsourcing plus expertise from Emgineering, we'll make actionable 
progress. 

Take care,

Matt Laurenceau
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me at @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau


On 13 sept. 2011, at 09:23, Jason Miller  wrote:

> ** Hi Matt,
> 
> I added a few updates.  Thanks for getting this rolling.
> 
> Jason
> 
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Matt Laurenceau  
> wrote:
> ** I have commitment from a manager in BMC Engineering to share ideas (he 
> actually proposed his help while looking at ARSList - great!)
> 
> I have drafted something to begin with.
> Please check it out, and share your thoughts.
> Add a Comment if you want to send a heads-up
> Edit the Doc directly (yes, wikipedia-style), should you be able to make 
> things progress directly (for example, I asked questions where some of you 
> may also have the answers)
> This is a great Use Case showing how powerful the Remedy Developer Community 
> is, I'm really excited by this 1st topic.
> 
> Take care, Matt
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> 
> Follow me @Matt_L
> 
> 
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Jason Miller  wrote:
> **
> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so 
> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other 
> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively 
> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as 
> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
> 
> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning 
> to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without 
> runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the 
> site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up 
> (I am guilty too).
> 
> I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making 
> updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person 
> project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler a 
> while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop without 
> compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not contributed any 
> code to the project.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that 
> pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.
> Is it that we are all just too busy?
> Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to 
> Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we just 
> don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
> Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on somebody 
> else's time/system?
> Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have been 
> asking for for a few years?
> I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.  I know 
> I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's resources 
> (servers, support contract).
> Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite Stack 
> Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.  Maybe a 
> downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand there are licensing 
> issues with distributing other companies' software (Windows/MS SQL/Oracle).  
> Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)
> Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these 
> things moving. ;-)
> 
> Jason
> _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> ~ Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> Follow me at @Matt_L
> Skype: matt.laurenceau 
> 
> _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: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Hi Matt,

I added a few updates.  Thanks for getting this rolling.

Jason

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Matt Laurenceau
wrote:

> ** I have commitment from a manager in BMC Engineering to share ideas (he
> actually proposed his help while looking at ARSList - great!)
>
> I have drafted something to begin 
> with
> .
> Please check it out, and share your thoughts.
>
>- Add a *Comment *if you want to send a heads-up
>- *Edit* the Doc directly (yes, wikipedia-style), should you be able to
>make things progress directly (for example, I asked questions where some of
>you may also have the answers)
>
> This is a great Use Case showing how powerful the Remedy Developer
> Community is, I'm really excited by this 1st topic.
>
> Take care, Matt
>
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
>
> Follow me @Matt_L 
>
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Jason Miller wrote:
>
>> **
>> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
>> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
>> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
>> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
>> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
>>
>> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been
>> meaning to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad
>> without runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton
>> provided the site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep
>> the site up (I am guilty too).
>>
>> I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
>> updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
>> project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
>> a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
>> without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
>> contributed any code to the project.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
>> pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.
>>
>>- Is it that we are all just too busy?
>>- Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared
>>to Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that 
>> we
>>just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
>>- Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
>>somebody else's time/system?
>>- Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
>>been asking for for a few years?
>>   - I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system
>>   question.  I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my
>>   employer's resources (servers, support contract).
>>   - Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the
>>   Suite Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this 
>> resource.
>>Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand 
>> there are
>>   licensing issues with distributing other companies' software 
>> (Windows/MS
>>   SQL/Oracle).  Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)
>>
>> Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these
>> things moving. ;-)
>>
>> Jason
>> _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ~ Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> Follow me at @Matt_L 
> Skype: matt.laurenceau
>
>  _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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[Jason Miller]

Good call!  I must have not had enough coffee when ran this query the other
day.  I just ran it again wondering why there was such a large difference
between our counts and came up with 34,916 fields over the 1,000,000,000
mark.  There is still a large difference but I am not way low any more :)

7.6.04 SP1, Atrium Core, AIE, ITSM, SLM, RKM.

Jason

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Remedy  wrote:

> **
>
> I did a quick check on ARSystem 7.6.04 SP2 with Atrium Core, AIE, ITSM
> installed. There are 3,821 records in the FIELD table that have fieldID
> values running from 1,000,000,000 – 1,536,916,750.
>
> ** **
>
> The forms that have these fields in the range seem to cover a wide
> assortment of forms, everything from the Group form to AIE, CMDB, and others
> 
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
> _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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[Remedy]

I did a quick check on ARSystem 7.6.04 SP2 with Atrium Core, AIE, ITSM
installed. There are 3,821 records in the FIELD table that have fieldID
values running from 1,000,000,000 - 1,536,916,750.

 

The forms that have these fields in the range seem to cover a wide
assortment of forms, everything from the Group form to AIE, CMDB, and others

 

 


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

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[LJ LongWing]

I know several of the MVP WINNERS that talk like that.LOL..besides.I didn't
actually SAY anything bad J..didn't even TYPE anything bad J

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 2:24 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** Now is that appropriate from a MVP candidate?  :)

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

** 

Like that time I called you a !@#$@#$ @#@#$ @#$@#$@...oh.the good times

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 1:51 PM


To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** Exactly.  I have to admit those barriers to entry must also be a factor
in why the Remedy community works so well.  There is incentive to remaining
professional since we are usually representing somebody else and that
somebody puts food on the table.  Some of those other communities where all
you needs is a used book to start can get kind of vile.  I remember only a
handful of times when there were some personal jabs against another Lister.

 

 

Jason

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:54 AM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

** 

Jason,

I think you are correct on the 'too small' on the community part.  In the
other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a
'Java for dummies' book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start
producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a
Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract
before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server.now
granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before.so
no real complaints about that.but I wouldn't have been able to do any of it
unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run
Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle.so it's not really the
'cost' of running a free server.but there is A LOT of setup needed.and it's
just not 'inviting' for people to get into the community.  And because of
all of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is
done on someone else's dime.so unless you have a 'great boss', you can't
publish it on the internet for free.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM


To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
many as I think a lot of us would like to see.

 

Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
(I am guilty too).

 

I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
contributed any code to the project.

 

Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.

*   Is it that we are all just too busy?
*   Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared
to Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
*   Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
somebody else's time/system?
*   Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
been asking for for a few years?

*   I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.
I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's
resources (servers, support contract).
*   Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.
Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand there are
licensing issues with distributing other companies' software (Window

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Now is that appropriate from a MVP candidate?  :)

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

> **
>
> Like that time I called you a !@#$@#$ @#@#$ @#$@#$@...oh…the good times***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Monday, September 12, 2011 1:51 PM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** **
>
> ** Exactly.  I have to admit those barriers to entry must also be a factor
> in why the Remedy community works so well.  There is incentive to remaining
> professional since we are usually representing somebody else and that
> somebody puts food on the table.  Some of those other communities where all
> you needs is a used book to start can get kind of vile.  I remember only a
> handful of times when there were some personal jabs against another Lister.
> 
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Jason
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:54 AM, LJ LongWing 
> wrote:
>
> ** 
>
> Jason,
>
> I think you are correct on the ‘too small’ on the community part.  In the
> other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a
> ‘Java for dummies’ book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start
> producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a
> Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract
> before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server…now
> granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before…so
> no real complaints about that…but I wouldn’t have been able to do any of it
> unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run
> Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle…so it’s not really the
> ‘cost’ of running a free server…but there is A LOT of setup needed…and it’s
> just not ‘inviting’ for people to get into the community.  And because of
> all of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is
> done on someone else’s dime…so unless you have a ‘great boss’, you can’t
> publish it on the internet for free…
>
>  
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM
>
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>  
>
> ** 
>
> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
>
>  
>
> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
> to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
> runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
> site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
> (I am guilty too).
>
>  
>
> I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
> updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
> project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
> a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
> without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
> contributed any code to the project.
>
>  
>
> Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
> pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.
>
>- Is it that we are all just too busy?
>- Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to
>Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
>just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
>
>- Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
>somebody else's time/system?
>- Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
>been asking for for a few years?
>
>
>- I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.
>I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's
>   resources (servers, support contract).
>   - Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
>   Sta

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Listers,

friends in Texas are reviewing IP implications. I'll update as needed.

For the SME Market approach, there is currently no solution that satisfies
David Easter.
But you know him, he works hard on creative workarounds to make that happen!
No ETA to share yet on the options he looks at, but you'll be the first to
know when things progress :)

Cheers, Matt


On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:13 PM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

> **
>
> Like that time I called you a !@#$@#$ @#@#$ @#$@#$@...oh…the good times***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Monday, September 12, 2011 1:51 PM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** **
>
> ** Exactly.  I have to admit those barriers to entry must also be a factor
> in why the Remedy community works so well.  There is incentive to remaining
> professional since we are usually representing somebody else and that
> somebody puts food on the table.  Some of those other communities where all
> you needs is a used book to start can get kind of vile.  I remember only a
> handful of times when there were some personal jabs against another Lister.
> 
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Jason
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:54 AM, LJ LongWing 
> wrote:
>
> ** 
>
> Jason,
>
> I think you are correct on the ‘too small’ on the community part.  In the
> other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a
> ‘Java for dummies’ book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start
> producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a
> Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract
> before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server…now
> granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before…so
> no real complaints about that…but I wouldn’t have been able to do any of it
> unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run
> Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle…so it’s not really the
> ‘cost’ of running a free server…but there is A LOT of setup needed…and it’s
> just not ‘inviting’ for people to get into the community.  And because of
> all of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is
> done on someone else’s dime…so unless you have a ‘great boss’, you can’t
> publish it on the internet for free…
>
>  
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM
>
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>  
>
> ** 
>
> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
>
>  
>
> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
> to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
> runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
> site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
> (I am guilty too).
>
>  
>
> I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
> updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
> project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
> a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
> without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
> contributed any code to the project.
>
>  
>
> Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
> pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.
>
>- Is it that we are all just too busy?
>- Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to
>Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
>just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
>
>- Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
>somebody else's time/system?
>- Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
>been asking for for a few years?
>
>
>- I th

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[LJ LongWing]

Like that time I called you a !@#$@#$ @#@#$ @#$@#$@...oh.the good times

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 1:51 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** Exactly.  I have to admit those barriers to entry must also be a factor
in why the Remedy community works so well.  There is incentive to remaining
professional since we are usually representing somebody else and that
somebody puts food on the table.  Some of those other communities where all
you needs is a used book to start can get kind of vile.  I remember only a
handful of times when there were some personal jabs against another Lister.

 

 

Jason

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:54 AM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

** 

Jason,

I think you are correct on the 'too small' on the community part.  In the
other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a
'Java for dummies' book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start
producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a
Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract
before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server.now
granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before.so
no real complaints about that.but I wouldn't have been able to do any of it
unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run
Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle.so it's not really the
'cost' of running a free server.but there is A LOT of setup needed.and it's
just not 'inviting' for people to get into the community.  And because of
all of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is
done on someone else's dime.so unless you have a 'great boss', you can't
publish it on the internet for free.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM


To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
many as I think a lot of us would like to see.

 

Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
(I am guilty too).

 

I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
contributed any code to the project.

 

Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.

*   Is it that we are all just too busy?
*   Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared
to Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
*   Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
somebody else's time/system?
*   Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
been asking for for a few years?

*   I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.
I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's
resources (servers, support contract).
*   Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.
Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand there are
licensing issues with distributing other companies' software (Windows/MS
SQL/Oracle).  Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)

Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these
things moving. ;-)

 

Jason

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

_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: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Exactly.  I have to admit those barriers to entry must also be a factor in
why the Remedy community works so well.  There is incentive to remaining
professional since we are usually representing somebody else and that
somebody puts food on the table.  Some of those other communities where all
you needs is a used book to start can get kind of vile.  I remember only a
handful of times when there were some personal jabs against another Lister.


Jason

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:54 AM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

> **
>
> Jason,
>
> I think you are correct on the ‘too small’ on the community part.  In the
> other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a
> ‘Java for dummies’ book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start
> producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a
> Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract
> before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server…now
> granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before…so
> no real complaints about that…but I wouldn’t have been able to do any of it
> unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run
> Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle…so it’s not really the
> ‘cost’ of running a free server…but there is A LOT of setup needed…and it’s
> just not ‘inviting’ for people to get into the community.  And because of
> all of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is
> done on someone else’s dime…so unless you have a ‘great boss’, you can’t
> publish it on the internet for free…
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** **
>
> ** 
>
> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
>
> ** **
>
> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
> to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
> runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
> site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
> (I am guilty too).
>
> ** **
>
> I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
> updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
> project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
> a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
> without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
> contributed any code to the project.
>
> ** **
>
> Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
> pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.
>
>- Is it that we are all just too busy?
>- Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to
>Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
>just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
>
>- Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
>somebody else's time/system?
>- Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
>been asking for for a few years?
>
>
>- I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.
>I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's
>   resources (servers, support contract).
>   - Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
>   Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.
>Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand there 
> are
>   licensing issues with distributing other companies' software (Windows/MS
>   SQL/Oracle).  Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)
>
> Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these
> things moving. ;-)
>
> ** **
>
> Jason
>
> _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: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

This convo began with a very fair comment on field IDs and easily share 
apps/utilities. 

It now moves to an even more fundamental topic, huge community leverage :)

VENUE and TRAFFIC
Jason Miller is very right, BMCDN currently is a great place to share 
apps&utilities, check Documents for example on the AR System community (earlier 
today, I set up the WWRUG Twitter feed on this very community). There are 
thousands of members there.

It's a chicken and egg thing, you will find cool apps/utilities there ... if 
others in the community posts these cool toys. Go ahead and seed with some dev 
you've done!

LEGAL
Now, we get into another exciting topic, legal & licensing.
I'm checking that out, and will make sure to have his thread updated. 



I get your point about SME market. 
David Easter (my mentor in many areas ;) will drive the best decision. 

Take care,

~ Matt Laurenceau
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau 

On 12 sept. 2011, at 18:28, "Meyer, Jennifer L"  wrote:

> **
> Thank you for posting such good points, LJ & Jason.
> 
>  
> 
> We are a very small community, but another issue is the flux of the 
> community.  A small percentage of people in the community have been on this 
> list for a decade (or longer).  A very large percentage trolls the list, but 
> doesn’t regularly contribute.  The remainder of the community have other 
> “main” jobs and found themselves taking on Remedy responsibilities in 
> addition to their other work.
> 
>  
> 
> Of course, the fact that we’re working on somebody else’s dime **shouldn’t** 
> eliminate collaboration, but it does restrict it to a large degree.  The 
> contract requirement is also prohibitive.  The cost of AR server licenses is 
> large enough that Remedy is not cost-effective for mom-and-pop operations or 
> local non-profits, which limits the pool of developers to active government, 
> public, and large private-sector employees.
> 
>  
> 
> Smaller organizations, i.e. those without entire legal departments, use small 
> AR System competitors.  While those are more cost-effective, they don’t have 
> the full range of features and steady development pace that AR System 
> provides.  Their developers may have more time and inclination to play, but 
> don’t have the community support to share ideas with.
> 
>  
> 
> It would be nice to have a BMC-sanctioned locale to share definition files 
> without fear of retribution rather than re-inventing the wheel at every 
> organization.
> 
>  
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> 
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 10:54 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
>  
> 
> **
> 
> Jason,
> 
> I think you are correct on the ‘too small’ on the community part.  In the 
> other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a 
> ‘Java for dummies’ book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start 
> producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a 
> Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract 
> before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server…now 
> granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before…so 
> no real complaints about that…but I wouldn’t have been able to do any of it 
> unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run 
> Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle…so it’s not really the 
> ‘cost’ of running a free server…but there is A LOT of setup needed…and it’s 
> just not ‘inviting’ for people to get into the community.  And because of all 
> of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is done 
> on someone else’s dime…so unless you have a ‘great boss’, you can’t publish 
> it on the internet for free…
> 
>  
> 
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
>  
> 
> **
> 
> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so 
> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other 
> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively 
> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as 
> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
> 
>  
> 
> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities th

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Thank you for starting the new topic, Matt.

Before we begin develop a standard, let's address questions regarding the 
relevance of data to be captured in the database id.

Assumptions
Given the range of database ids is 600,000,000 to 999,999,999:
The first digit may contain the numerals 6-9.
The other 8 digits may contain numerals 0-9.
2-3 digits should be allowed for sequential numbering.  They are relevant to 
the form, other fields on the form, and duplication across forms.

What data do we want to convey?  I think these are the most important pieces of 
data, but I might be wrong.

1.  Application (Asset, Request Mgt, Change, Archive, Custom)

2.  Field Usage (i.e. a zTmp field has vastly different usage than a 
Request ID field.  Some forms can hold 3 or 4 Request IDs, and they ought to be 
noted.)

3.  Is it useful to denote fields used on multiple forms?

What data do we NOT want to preserve?

1.  I don't believe that the creator of the information is particularly 
important for shared files.  Do we want to waste precious digits when authoring 
rights can be captured in Help Text or Change Log?

2.  Same for Field Type.  That data is included in the definition file.  I 
don't care whether it's a character field or an enumerated field, but I'd like 
to know the impact of changing the field.

How are we able to convey that information?
How do we want to organize the information in our allotted 9 digits?

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/>

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
authorized State Official.
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 6:03 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** I have commitment from a manager in BMC Engineering to share ideas (he 
actually proposed his help while looking at ARSList - great!)

I have drafted something to begin 
with<https://communities.bmc.com/communities/docs/DOC-16743>.
Please check it out, and share your thoughts.

  *   Add a Comment if you want to send a heads-up
  *   Edit the Doc directly (yes, wikipedia-style), should you be able to make 
things progress directly (for example, I asked questions where some of you may 
also have the answers)
This is a great Use Case showing how powerful the Remedy Developer Community 
is, I'm really excited by this 1st topic.

Take care, Matt
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me @Matt_L<https://twitter.com/matt_L>

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Jason Miller 
mailto:jason.mil...@gmail.com>> wrote:
**
Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so many 
communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other 
languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively 
used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as 
many as I think a lot of us would like to see.

Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning to 
post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without 
runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org<http://arswiki.org> come and go.  
Axton provided the site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to 
keep the site up (I am guilty too).

I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making 
updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person 
project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler a 
while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop without 
compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not contributed any 
code to the project.

Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that 
pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.

  *   Is it that we are all just too busy?
  *   Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to 
Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we just 
don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
  *   Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on somebody 
else's time/system?
  *   Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have been 
asking for for a few years?

 *   I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.  
I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employ

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Thank you for posting such good points, LJ & Jason.

We are a very small community, but another issue is the flux of the community.  
A small percentage of people in the community have been on this list for a 
decade (or longer).  A very large percentage trolls the list, but doesn't 
regularly contribute.  The remainder of the community have other "main" jobs 
and found themselves taking on Remedy responsibilities in addition to their 
other work.

Of course, the fact that we're working on somebody else's dime **shouldn't** 
eliminate collaboration, but it does restrict it to a large degree.  The 
contract requirement is also prohibitive.  The cost of AR server licenses is 
large enough that Remedy is not cost-effective for mom-and-pop operations or 
local non-profits, which limits the pool of developers to active government, 
public, and large private-sector employees.

Smaller organizations, i.e. those without entire legal departments, use small 
AR System competitors.  While those are more cost-effective, they don't have 
the full range of features and steady development pace that AR System provides. 
 Their developers may have more time and inclination to play, but don't have 
the community support to share ideas with.

It would be nice to have a BMC-sanctioned locale to share definition files 
without fear of retribution rather than re-inventing the wheel at every 
organization.

Jennifer Meyer
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 10:54 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**
Jason,
I think you are correct on the 'too small' on the community part.  In the other 
languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a 'Java for 
dummies' book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start producing Java 
code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a Server, DB, and 
most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract before you can even 
download an un-licensed version of the server...now granted, I have done some 
awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before...so no real complaints about 
that...but I wouldn't have been able to do any of it unless I was already on 
contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run Remedy on free versions of both 
SQL Server and Oracle...so it's not really the 'cost' of running a free 
server...but there is A LOT of setup needed...and it's just not 'inviting' for 
people to get into the community.  And because of all of the above, that means 
that a vast majority of everything developed is done on someone else's 
dime...so unless you have a 'great boss', you can't publish it on the internet 
for free...

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**
Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so many 
communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other 
languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively 
used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as 
many as I think a lot of us would like to see.

Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning to 
post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without 
runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org<http://arswiki.org> come and go.  
Axton provided the site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to 
keep the site up (I am guilty too).

I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making 
updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person 
project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler a 
while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop without 
compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not contributed any 
code to the project.

Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that 
pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.

  *   Is it that we are all just too busy?
  *   Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to 
Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we just 
don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
  *   Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on somebody 
else's time/system?
  *   Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have been 
asking for for a few years?

 *   I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.  
I know I can&

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[LJ LongWing]

Jason,

I think you are correct on the 'too small' on the community part.  In the
other languages, some middle schooler can go to a garage sale, pick up a
'Java for dummies' book, install tons of free frameworks/tools, and start
producing Java code for free in his bedroom.  We on the other hand require a
Server, DB, and most importantly, a CONTRACT.  You MUST have a contract
before you can even download an un-licensed version of the server.now
granted, I have done some awesome stuff with an unlicensed server before.so
no real complaints about that.but I wouldn't have been able to do any of it
unless I was already on contract to do other remedy stuff.  You can run
Remedy on free versions of both SQL Server and Oracle.so it's not really the
'cost' of running a free server.but there is A LOT of setup needed.and it's
just not 'inviting' for people to get into the community.  And because of
all of the above, that means that a vast majority of everything developed is
done on someone else's dime.so unless you have a 'great boss', you can't
publish it on the internet for free.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 5:53 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
many as I think a lot of us would like to see.

 

Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
(I am guilty too).

 

I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
contributed any code to the project.

 

Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.

*   Is it that we are all just too busy?
*   Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared
to Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
*   Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
somebody else's time/system?
*   Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
been asking for for a few years?

*   I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.
I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's
resources (servers, support contract).
*   Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.
Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand there are
licensing issues with distributing other companies' software (Windows/MS
SQL/Oracle).  Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)

Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these
things moving. ;-)

 

Jason

_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: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

I have commitment from a manager in BMC Engineering to share ideas (he
actually proposed his help while looking at ARSList - great!)

I have drafted something to begin
with
.
Please check it out, and share your thoughts.

   - Add a *Comment *if you want to send a heads-up
   - *Edit* the Doc directly (yes, wikipedia-style), should you be able to
   make things progress directly (for example, I asked questions where some of
   you may also have the answers)

This is a great Use Case showing how powerful the Remedy Developer Community
is, I'm really excited by this 1st topic.

Take care, Matt

Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities

Follow me @Matt_L 

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Jason Miller wrote:

> **
> Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
> many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
> languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
> used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
> many as I think a lot of us would like to see.
>
> Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
> to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
> runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
> site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
> (I am guilty too).
>
> I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
> updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
> project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
> a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
> without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
> contributed any code to the project.
>
> Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
> pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.
>
>- Is it that we are all just too busy?
>- Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to
>Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
>just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
>- Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
>somebody else's time/system?
>- Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
>been asking for for a few years?
>   - I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system
>   question.  I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my
>   employer's resources (servers, support contract).
>   - Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
>   Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.
>Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I understand there 
> are
>   licensing issues with distributing other companies' software (Windows/MS
>   SQL/Oracle).  Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)
>
> Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these
> things moving. ;-)
>
> Jason
> _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_
>



-- 

~ Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me at @Matt_L 
Skype: matt.laurenceau

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

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Joe, you nailed it (although I did get Jennifer's joke too).  There are so
many communities where you can download code/functions/scripts/etc for other
languages but there isn't one for Remedy; well it is there just not actively
used in this manner.  There are a few apps/utilities on the BMCDN but not as
many as I think a lot of us would like to see.

Now to be perfectly honest, I have a few utilities that I have been meaning
to post to the BMCDN for a few years now (the data export one is sad without
runmacro.exe).  We have seen arswiki.org come and go.  Axton provided the
site for years and there just wasn't enough involvement to keep the site up
(I am guilty too).

I am fearful that the same will happen with ARInside.  I see John making
updates when he has some time but can it survive as a one or two person
project?  Personally I would love to help out and even installed a compiler
a while back to work on my limited C++ skills.  Years, work, new laptop
without compiler, and grade school aged kids later I still have not
contributed any code to the project.

Don't get me wrong, always having sanctioned/paid work (and a family) that
pushes aside community projects is not a bad problem to have.

   - Is it that we are all just too busy?
   - Is it a ratio thing in that we are such a small community compared to
   Java/C++/HTML/PowerShell/ communities that we
   just don't have enough people to contribute a decent volume of projects?
   - Is it that we cannot share what we build because it was done on
   somebody else's time/system?
   - Would it help if there was an AR MSDN like subscription that we have
   been asking for for a few years?
  - I think this is related to the somebody else's time/system question.
   I know I can't afford to develop AR Applications without my employer's
  resources (servers, support contract).
  - Now with today's virtualization, hosted technologies and the Suite
  Stack Installer it would be easier than ever to provide this resource.
   Maybe a downloadable VM appliance (ADDM anybody?).  I
understand there are
  licensing issues with distributing other companies' software (Windows/MS
  SQL/Oracle).  Maybe it is time for a MySQL version of AR? :)

Hopefully now that we have a Community Ambassador we can get some of these
things moving. ;-)

Jason

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

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Oh damn it’s a Friday :-)


From: Meyer, Jennifer L 
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 4:34 PM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** 
Joe, you misunderstood my intent.  That was a joke, but I’m glad you agree with 
my reasoning.  J

 

Jennifer Meyer

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 4:12 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

 

Not necessarily.. 

 

I think I kind of like the idea.. What Jason meant is little utilities that you 
sometimes build for things like capturing/tracking IP addresses for eg. that 
Drew Shuller was asking about on a separate thread..

 

This is not a functionality that requires the effort of building an application 
or something.. Its just a little function.. It has already been done and 
doesn’t really require to be reinvented..

 

If this was available to ‘plug and play’ you could use your development time 
for something that you really need to build from scratch that has never been 
done before – or may have been done before but there was no way to have it 
‘plugged and played’..

 

Joe

 

From: Meyer, Jennifer L 

Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:49 PM

Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 

Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

Thinking like that is going to destabilize our job security.

 

Jennifer Meyer

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

Another good reason for having some form of standard or convention.  I have a 
few defs that are "plug and play". I use some of these tools wherever I go.  
Kind of like a "traditional" developer might have functions or routines they 
develop over time.  Some are admin tools and some are things like a shared 
attachment form, shared audit (work info) form, etc.  You just need to add a 
few fields here and there and update some workflow.

If we had consistent guidelines it would make it just that much easier.

Wouldn't it be cool to have more "plug and play" (best practice/standard) apps 
available on the BMCDN?

Jason

On Sep 9, 2011 8:19 AM, "Meyer, Jennifer L"  wrote:
> Thanks, Matt. :)
> 
> I've worked Remedy at more than a dozen companies, and we have to re-invent 
> the wheel every time. If we can establish a best practice, that's one less 
> headache for future development.
> 
> If BMC will be involved in development of the BP or promoting it, we can all 
> benefit by sharing code.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
> http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/>
> 
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
> authorized State Official.
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:04 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> ** Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
> R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
> Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure 
> quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)
> 
> I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.
> 
> Thanks for your engagement,
> 
> Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> Follow me at @Matt_L
> Skype: matt.laurenceau
> 
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
> mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>> wrote:
> **
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt. Personally, I don't think a development 
> standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved 
> in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development 
> best practices.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Matt 
> Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
> 
> To: arsl

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Not necessarily.. 

I think I kind of like the idea.. What Jason meant is little utilities that you 
sometimes build for things like capturing/tracking IP addresses for eg. that 
Drew Shuller was asking about on a separate thread..

This is not a functionality that requires the effort of building an application 
or something.. Its just a little function.. It has already been done and 
doesn’t really require to be reinvented..

If this was available to ‘plug and play’ you could use your development time 
for something that you really need to build from scratch that has never been 
done before – or may have been done before but there was no way to have it 
‘plugged and played’..

Joe

From: Meyer, Jennifer L 
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:49 PM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** 
Thinking like that is going to destabilize our job security.

 

Jennifer Meyer

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

 

** 

Another good reason for having some form of standard or convention.  I have a 
few defs that are "plug and play". I use some of these tools wherever I go.  
Kind of like a "traditional" developer might have functions or routines they 
develop over time.  Some are admin tools and some are things like a shared 
attachment form, shared audit (work info) form, etc.  You just need to add a 
few fields here and there and update some workflow.

If we had consistent guidelines it would make it just that much easier.

Wouldn't it be cool to have more "plug and play" (best practice/standard) apps 
available on the BMCDN?

Jason

On Sep 9, 2011 8:19 AM, "Meyer, Jennifer L"  wrote:
> Thanks, Matt. :)
> 
> I've worked Remedy at more than a dozen companies, and we have to re-invent 
> the wheel every time. If we can establish a best practice, that's one less 
> headache for future development.
> 
> If BMC will be involved in development of the BP or promoting it, we can all 
> benefit by sharing code.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
> http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/>
> 
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
> authorized State Official.
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:04 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> ** Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
> R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
> Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure 
> quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)
> 
> I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.
> 
> Thanks for your engagement,
> 
> Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> Follow me at @Matt_L
> Skype: matt.laurenceau
> 
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
> mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>> wrote:
> **
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt. Personally, I don't think a development 
> standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved 
> in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development 
> best practices.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Matt 
> Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
> 
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> ** First take on current status:
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap 
> with BMC's reserved range.
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
> archid is still a
> 
> Cheers, Matt
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau 
> mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Very valuable convo indeed.
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or 
> enfo

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Thinking like that is going to destabilize our job security.

Jennifer Meyer
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**

Another good reason for having some form of standard or convention.  I have a 
few defs that are "plug and play". I use some of these tools wherever I go.  
Kind of like a "traditional" developer might have functions or routines they 
develop over time.  Some are admin tools and some are things like a shared 
attachment form, shared audit (work info) form, etc.  You just need to add a 
few fields here and there and update some workflow.

If we had consistent guidelines it would make it just that much easier.

Wouldn't it be cool to have more "plug and play" (best practice/standard) apps 
available on the BMCDN?

Jason
On Sep 9, 2011 8:19 AM, "Meyer, Jennifer L" 
mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>> wrote:
> Thanks, Matt. :)
>
> I've worked Remedy at more than a dozen companies, and we have to re-invent 
> the wheel every time. If we can establish a best practice, that's one less 
> headache for future development.
>
> If BMC will be involved in development of the BP or promoting it, we can all 
> benefit by sharing code.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov><mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>>
> http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/>
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
> authorized State Official.
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Matt 
> Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:04 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
> R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
> Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure 
> quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)
>
> I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.
>
> Thanks for your engagement,
>
> Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> Follow me at @Matt_L
> Skype: matt.laurenceau
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
> mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov><mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>>>
>  wrote:
> **
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt. Personally, I don't think a development 
> standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved 
> in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development 
> best practices.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG><mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>>]
>  On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
>
> To: 
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG><mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>>
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** First take on current status:
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap 
> with BMC's reserved range.
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
> archid is still a
>
> Cheers, Matt
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau 
> mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com><mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com<mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com>>>
>  wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Very valuable convo indeed.
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or 
> enforced).
>
> Thanks, Matt
> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall 
> mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com><mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com<mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com>>>
>  wrote:
> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Another good reason for having some form of standard or convention.  I have
a few defs that are "plug and play". I use some of these tools wherever I
go.  Kind of like a "traditional" developer might have functions or routines
they develop over time.  Some are admin tools and some are things like a
shared attachment form, shared audit (work info) form, etc.  You just need
to add a few fields here and there and update some workflow.

If we had consistent guidelines it would make it just that much easier.

Wouldn't it be cool to have more "plug and play" (best practice/standard)
apps available on the BMCDN?

Jason
On Sep 9, 2011 8:19 AM, "Meyer, Jennifer L"  wrote:
> Thanks, Matt. :)
>
> I've worked Remedy at more than a dozen companies, and we have to
re-invent the wheel every time. If we can establish a best practice, that's
one less headache for future development.
>
> If BMC will be involved in development of the BP or promoting it, we can
all benefit by sharing code.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
> http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/>
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
authorized State Official.
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:04 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
> R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
> Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure
quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)
>
> I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.
>
> Thanks for your engagement,
>
> Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> Follow me at @Matt_L
> Skype: matt.laurenceau
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>> wrote:
> **
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt. Personally, I don't think a development
standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved
in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development
best practices.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Matt
Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
>
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** First take on current status:
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap
with BMC's reserved range.
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
> archid is still a
>
> Cheers, Matt
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Very valuable convo indeed.
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
enforced).
>
> Thanks, Matt
> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<
https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com>> wrote:
> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> company creator.
>
> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Goodall
> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com<
http://www.jcp.com>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of
Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> This thread is fascinating. I think this may be the forum to decide on
> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of 

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Jennifer,

Win-win sounds very good to me :)

Based on this big convo, we'll draft some ideas and send them your way for 
review. 

Have a great week-end,

Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me at @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau 

On 9 sept. 2011, at 17:19, "Meyer, Jennifer L"  wrote:

> **
> Thanks, Matt.  J
> 
>  
> 
> I’ve worked Remedy at more than a dozen companies, and we have to re-invent 
> the wheel every time.  If we can establish a best practice, that’s one less 
> headache for future development. 
> 
>  
> 
> If BMC will be involved in development of the BP or promoting it, we can all 
> benefit by sharing code.  
> 
>  
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> 
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> 
> State of North Carolina
> 
> Office of Information Technology Services
> 
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> 
> Office: 919-754-6543
> 
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> 
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> 
> http://its.state.nc.us
> 
>  
> 
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
> authorized State Official.
> 
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:04 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
>  
> 
> ** Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
> 
> R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
> 
> Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure 
> quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)
> 
>  
> 
> I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks for your engagement,
> 
>  
> 
> Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
> 
> Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
> 
> Follow me at @Matt_L
> 
> Skype: matt.laurenceau 
> 
>  
> 
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L  
> wrote:
> 
> **
> 
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt.  Personally, I don’t think a development 
> standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved 
> in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development 
> best practices.
> 
>  
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> 
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
> 
> 
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
>  
> 
> ** First take on current status:
> 
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap 
> with BMC's reserved range.
> 
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
> 
> archid is still a
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers, Matt
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi.
> 
>  
> 
> Very valuable convo indeed.
> 
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or 
> enforced).
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks, Matt
> 
> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau   
> 
>  
> 
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall  wrote:
> 
> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
> 
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> company creator.
> 
> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> choice for custom fields - thanks.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Andrew Goodall
> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> 
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
> 
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> each other, we are all using the same standard.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
> 
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may 

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[Jason Miller]

Our 7.6.04 SP1 (minus Analytic/Dashboards/SRM) has 137 fields
above 10.

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza wrote:

> **
>
> Yes BMC has definitely started using the bottom range of the 10
> mark onwards from as early as ITSM 6.3 I think.. You will see those fields
> if you do a query for:
>
> select fieldid, fieldname from field where fieldid >= 10;
>
> If you have no fields of your own that you have created in that range, you
> will see a list of fields that exist which are all BMC created fields..
> There are quite a few of them. Don’t have a system I can query against right
> now or I’d send in the list on a 7.6.04.
>
> Joe
>
>  *From:* David Durling 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 9:15 AM
> *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)
>
> **
>
> Also, having 9 numbers in a row might trigger false positives if you do a
> security scan on a system (like a PC containing def files) to try to detect
> United States social security numbers.  Seems like might have happened for
> me once.
>
> 
>
> So allowing alphabetical characters, or maybe using the 1,000,000,000 range
> (though it sounds from Jennifer like BMC’s already started using the bottom
> of that a little) might avoid that.
>
> 
>
> David
>
> 
>
> David Durling
>
> University of Georgia
>
> 
>
> 
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 4:42 AM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)
>
> 
>
> ** 
>
> That is a pretty sweet idea.  You could prefix field IDs like forms and
> workflow.
>
> On Sep 8, 2011 10:00 AM, "Joe Martin D'Souza" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a we bit..
> >
> > Instead of having just numerical ID’s, they modified their internal meta
> data structure a bit that Field ID’s could accommodate characters as well..
> Then you could actually have meaningful Field ID’s instead of having to come
> up with some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges
> could still be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to
> designing ‘Keyword’ kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more
> possibilities..
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > From: Jason Miller
> > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
> > Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >
> > ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but
> the consistency pays off later. I brought back a numbering scheme when I
> returned to my current employer. We have have been using it now for 3 years
> and it is paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and
> "foundation" forms.
> >
> > The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used
> field ID for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a
> new field. Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well
> as ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number
> to the clipboard). There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid
> prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for
> the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.
> >
> > Here are the number ranges we use.
> > Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields
> > Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A
> >
> > Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998
> > Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998
> > Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698
> > Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 60001 298
> > Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998
> > Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998
> > Views 60010 N/A
> >
> > Groups 120 129 9
> >
> > We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name
> <600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01
> <600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc. Right now
> it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for
> a while. What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio
> so it autom

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Yes BMC has definitely started using the bottom range of the 10 mark 
onwards from as early as ITSM 6.3 I think.. You will see those fields if you do 
a query for:

select fieldid, fieldname from field where fieldid >= 10;

If you have no fields of your own that you have created in that range, you will 
see a list of fields that exist which are all BMC created fields.. There are 
quite a few of them. Don’t have a system I can query against right now or I’d 
send in the list on a 7.6.04.

Joe

From: David Durling 
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:15 AM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

** 
Also, having 9 numbers in a row might trigger false positives if you do a 
security scan on a system (like a PC containing def files) to try to detect 
United States social security numbers.  Seems like might have happened for me 
once.

 

So allowing alphabetical characters, or maybe using the 1,000,000,000 range 
(though it sounds from Jennifer like BMC’s already started using the bottom of 
that a little) might avoid that.

 

David

 

David Durling

University of Georgia

 

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 4:42 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

 

** 

That is a pretty sweet idea.  You could prefix field IDs like forms and 
workflow.

On Sep 8, 2011 10:00 AM, "Joe Martin D'Souza"  wrote:
> 
> Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a we bit..
> 
> Instead of having just numerical ID’s, they modified their internal meta data 
> structure a bit that Field ID’s could accommodate characters as well.. Then 
> you could actually have meaningful Field ID’s instead of having to come up 
> with some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges could 
> still be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to designing 
> ‘Keyword’ kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more possibilities..
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> From: Jason Miller 
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
> Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the 
> consistency pays off later. I brought back a numbering scheme when I returned 
> to my current employer. We have have been using it now for 3 years and it is 
> paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and "foundation" forms.
> 
> The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field ID 
> for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new field. 
> Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as 
> ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to 
> the clipboard). There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid 
> prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for 
> the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.
> 
> Here are the number ranges we use.
> Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields 
> Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A 
> 
> Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998 
> Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998 
> Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698 
> Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 60001 298 
> Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 
> Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998 
> Views 60010 N/A 
> 
> Groups 120 129 9 
> 
> We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name 
> <600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01 
> <600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc. Right now 
> it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for 
> a while. What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio so 
> it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)
> 
> Jason
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer  wrote:
> 
> ** 
> David,
> 
> Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because that 
> is BMC's range. One never knows what the future brings. And even though your 
> custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use them 
> inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past biting 
> you in the ###. 
> 
> When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it w

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

At the most recent site I worked, they used a slightly similar prefix as 
yours.. They had an internally generated 3 digit schema ID for every schema 
that is customized or developed, (not the ID from the arschema), and used 
that ID for the middle 3 digits... that left you with 6 digits for other 
stuff.. They used the leftmost 3 digits for field type and right most 3 
digits for incrementing the field ID


I had a personal preference in the past that was somewhat similar.. but 
instead of giving every customized or developed schema a new number, I gave 
a sub-module I considered it a part of an ID and used this as a middle 2 or 
3 digit number. Usually 2 digits when you break every of those 1500+ schemas 
into different sub-modules should be enough, but if you roll over then 
stepping into the 3 digit mark isn't that bad an idea either.. I used the 
left 2 digits for type of data (not data type), and the remaining right 
digits for incrementing field ID's. When using this method if you can remain 
within the 2 digits ID, you could even possibly squeeze in another 2 digits 
for something else (developer who originally developed a field, or internal 
version when the field was developed, whatever...)


For eg when working with CTM:People or any CTM:People related form, 
designate a 2 digit sub-module ID say 99 and if you considered contact 
information within the people form to have type of data ID to be 60, and if 
I wanted to add lets say Skype ID field to People form, I might choose the 
ID 60-99-0 which translates to 60990 would be used.. The next 
contact information related field, LinkedIn URL would be 60991.


I also had a personal convention for table fields and page fields that my 
previous customer adopted.. If using the above algorithm lets say if I had a 
page or table field main ID of 81990, then the columns or pages as the 
case may be would start getting ID's of 81991, 81992, 81993, 
etc.. For these fields I also had a Naming prefix for database names which 
serialized the database names serially for the main page of the table 
followed by pages, as well as table and their columns in table fields.. 
There are numerous conventions you can design to achieve that as I used more 
than one convention to do this at different sites..


Although I was using this method for a long time, I did feel some of the 
things used in my previous projects were a good idea so I might use a blend 
of both sets of ideas to come out with a new personal convention..


Joe


-Original Message- 
From: Reiser, John J
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Joe,
Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great idea if
BMC could pull it off.
The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still in
the acceptable range for developers.

The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular form/workflow
combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part is
looking for a field id of 6722x.
Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
interact with other objects in the system.

--- 
John J. Reiser

Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me


-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..

Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate
development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few
customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few days..
And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after that..
Go figure..

Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Meyer, Jennifer L

Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Thanks, Matt.  :)

I've worked Remedy at more than a dozen companies, and we have to re-invent the 
wheel every time.  If we can establish a best practice, that's one less 
headache for future development.

If BMC will be involved in development of the BP or promoting it, we can all 
benefit by sharing code.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
http://its.state.nc.us<http://its.state.nc.us/>

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
authorized State Official.
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:04 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure 
quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)

I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.

Thanks for your engagement,

Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me at @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L 
mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>> wrote:
**
Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt.  Personally, I don't think a development 
standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved in 
the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development best 
practices.

Jennifer Meyer
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Matt 
Laurenceau
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** First take on current status:
With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap with 
BMC's reserved range.
Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
archid is still a

Cheers, Matt


On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau 
mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi.

Very valuable convo indeed.
I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or 
enforced).

Thanks, Matt
http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall 
mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com>> wrote:
It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!

I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
company creator.

Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
choice for custom fields - thanks.

Regards,

Andrew Goodall
Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . 
www.jcp.com<http://www.jcp.com>

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Meyer, 
Jennifer L
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
each other, we are all using the same standard.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
only by an authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Reiser, 
John J
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Joe,
 Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
idea if
BMC could pull it off.
The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 15

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Jennifer, you've got a very valid point.
R&D now protects BMC range (with 7.6.04) to avoid major issues.
Reserving ID ranges for every developer/company/region/country is for sure
quite tricky, and I like the proposals :)

I have pinged bright minds at R&D to weigh in.

Thanks for your engagement,

Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me at @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Meyer, Jennifer L wrote:

> **
>
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt.  Personally, I don’t think a development
> standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved
> in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development
> best practices.
>
>
>
> Jennifer Meyer
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Matt Laurenceau
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>
>
> ** First take on current status:
>
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap
> with BMC's reserved range.
>
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
>
> archid is still a
>
>
>
> Cheers, Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau 
> wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
>
>
> Very valuable convo indeed.
>
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
> enforced).
>
>
>
> Thanks, Matt
>
> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall 
> wrote:
>
> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> company creator.
>
> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Goodall
> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
>
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
>
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
> only by an authorized State Official.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Joe,
>  Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
> idea if
> BMC could pull it off.
> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
> in
> the acceptable range for developers.
>
> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
> form/workflow
> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
> is
> looking for a field id of 6722x.
> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
> interact with other objects in the system.
>
> ---
> John J. Reiser
> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> Senior Software Development Analyst
> Lockheed Martin - MS2
> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
> by
> me
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
> Sent: Thursday, Septemb

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Susan Palmer]

Personally I don't think this falls in BMC's lap.  As developers we should
certainly be able to handle field ID assignment, it's just not that
complicated.  If you're working on a system that many contribute to then
outline the guidelines for that system and have all the developers follow
it.

Susan
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L wrote:

> **
>
> Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt.  Personally, I don’t think a development
> standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved
> in the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development
> best practices.
>
>
>
> Jennifer Meyer
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Matt Laurenceau
> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>
>
> ** First take on current status:
>
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap
> with BMC's reserved range.
>
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
>
> archid is still a
>
>
>
> Cheers, Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau 
> wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
>
>
> Very valuable convo indeed.
>
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
> enforced).
>
>
>
> Thanks, Matt
>
> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall 
> wrote:
>
> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> company creator.
>
> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Goodall
> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
>
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
>
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
> only by an authorized State Official.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Joe,
>  Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
> idea if
> BMC could pull it off.
> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
> in
> the acceptable range for developers.
>
> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
> form/workflow
> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
> is
> looking for a field id of 6722x.
> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
> interact with other objects in the system.
>
> ---
> John J. Reiser
> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> Senior Software Development Analyst
> Lockheed Martin - MS2
> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
> by
> me
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Ran

Re: OT:Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Thanks Jason for the warm welcome.
Happy to see such valuable convo here (and now interacting)

Matt Laurenceau, BMC Software
Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities
Follow me at @Matt_L
Skype: matt.laurenceau


On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Jason Miller  wrote:

> **
>
> Hi Matt!  Welcome to the List! It is nice to see you over here.
>
> Jason
> On Sep 9, 2011 7:15 AM, "Matt Laurenceau" 
> wrote:
> > First take on current status:
> > With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT
> overlap
> > with BMC's reserved range.
> >
> > Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
> > archid is still a
> >
> > Cheers, Matt
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Very valuable convo indeed.
> >> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
> >> enforced).
> >>
> >> Thanks, Matt
> >>
> >> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<
> https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall  >wrote:
> >>
> >>> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
> >>>
> >>> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> >>> company creator.
> >>>
> >>> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> >>> choice for custom fields - thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Andrew Goodall
> >>> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> >>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> >>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
> >>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> >>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >>>
> >>> This thread is fascinating. I think this may be the forum to decide on
> >>> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> >>> each other, we are all using the same standard.
> >>>
> >>> Jennifer Meyer
> >>> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> >>> State of North Carolina
> >>> Office of Information Technology Services
> >>> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> >>> Office: 919-754-6543
> >>> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> >>> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> >>> http://its.state.nc.us
> >>>
> >>> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
> >>> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
> >>> only by an authorized State Official.
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> >>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> >>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
> >>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> >>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >>>
> >>> Joe,
> >>> Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
> >>> idea if
> >>> BMC could pull it off.
> >>> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
> >>> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
> >>> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
> >>> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in
> burned
> >>> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is
> still
> >>> in
> >>> the acceptable range for developers.
> >>>
> >>> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
> >>> form/workflow
> >>> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
> >>> is
> >>> looking for a field id of 6722x.
> >>> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
> >>> interact with other objects in the system.
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> John J. Reiser
> >>> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> >>> Senior Software Development Analyst
> >>> Lockheed Martin - MS2
> >

OT:Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Hi Matt!  Welcome to the List! It is nice to see you over here.

Jason
On Sep 9, 2011 7:15 AM, "Matt Laurenceau"  wrote:
> First take on current status:
> With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap
> with BMC's reserved range.
>
> Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
> archid is still a
>
> Cheers, Matt
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau
> wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> Very valuable convo indeed.
>> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
>> enforced).
>>
>> Thanks, Matt
>>
>> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<
https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall wrote:
>>
>>> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>>>
>>> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
>>> company creator.
>>>
>>> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
>>> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Andrew Goodall
>>> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services | jcpenney . www.jcp.com
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
>>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>>
>>> This thread is fascinating. I think this may be the forum to decide on
>>> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
>>> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>>>
>>> Jennifer Meyer
>>> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
>>> State of North Carolina
>>> Office of Information Technology Services
>>> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
>>> Office: 919-754-6543
>>> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
>>> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
>>> http://its.state.nc.us
>>>
>>> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
>>> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
>>> only by an authorized State Official.
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
>>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>>
>>> Joe,
>>> Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
>>> idea if
>>> BMC could pull it off.
>>> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
>>> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
>>> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
>>> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
>>> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
>>> in
>>> the acceptable range for developers.
>>>
>>> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
>>> form/workflow
>>> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
>>> is
>>> looking for a field id of 6722x.
>>> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
>>> interact with other objects in the system.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> John J. Reiser
>>> Remedy Developer/Administrator
>>> Senior Software Development Analyst
>>> Lockheed Martin - MS2
>>> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
>>> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
>>> by
>>> me
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
>>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>>
>>> Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..
>>>
>>> Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate
>>> development server.. Fortunately for 

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Thanks for talking with BMC, Matt.  Personally, I don't think a development 
standard needs to be enforced at this time, but I think having BMC involved in 
the discussion would be valuable in establishing Database ID development best 
practices.

Jennifer Meyer
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Matt Laurenceau
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:15 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** First take on current status:
With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap with 
BMC's reserved range.
Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
archid is still a

Cheers, Matt


On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau 
mailto:matt.laurenc...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi.

Very valuable convo indeed.
I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or 
enforced).

Thanks, Matt
http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall 
mailto:ago...@jcpenney.com>> wrote:
It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!

I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
company creator.

Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
choice for custom fields - thanks.

Regards,

Andrew Goodall
Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . 
www.jcp.com<http://www.jcp.com>

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Meyer, 
Jennifer L
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
each other, we are all using the same standard.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov>
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
only by an authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Reiser, 
John J
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Joe,
 Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
idea if
BMC could pull it off.
The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
in
the acceptable range for developers.

The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
form/workflow
combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
is
looking for a field id of 6722x.
Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
interact with other objects in the system.

---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
by
me


-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Joe 
Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..

Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate
development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few
customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few
days..
And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after
that..
Go figure..

Joe

-Original Message-
From: Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message---

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

First take on current status:
With 7.6.04, Dev Studio enforces field IDs of custom fields to NOT overlap
with BMC's reserved range.

Follow-ups will come for the plans for the future.
archid is still a

Cheers, Matt


On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Matt Laurenceau
wrote:

> Hi.
>
> Very valuable convo indeed.
> I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
> enforced).
>
> Thanks, Matt
>
> http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall wrote:
>
>> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>>
>> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
>> company creator.
>>
>> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
>> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Andrew Goodall
>> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>
>> This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
>> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
>> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>>
>> Jennifer Meyer
>> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
>> State of North Carolina
>> Office of Information Technology Services
>> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
>> Office: 919-754-6543
>> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
>> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
>> http://its.state.nc.us
>>
>> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
>> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
>> only by an authorized State Official.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>
>> Joe,
>>  Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
>> idea if
>> BMC could pull it off.
>> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
>> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
>> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
>> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
>> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
>> in
>> the acceptable range for developers.
>>
>> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
>> form/workflow
>> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
>> is
>> looking for a field id of 6722x.
>> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
>> interact with other objects in the system.
>>
>> ---
>> John J. Reiser
>> Remedy Developer/Administrator
>> Senior Software Development Analyst
>> Lockheed Martin - MS2
>> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
>> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
>> by
>> me
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
>> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>
>> Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..
>>
>> Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate
>> development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few
>> customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few
>> days..
>> And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after
>> that..
>> Go figure..
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Meyer, Jennifer L
>> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups:
>> public.remedy.arsystem.general
>> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>
>> I remember that upgrade!

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Matt Laurenceau]

Hi.

Very valuable convo indeed.
I pinged BMC R&D, they'll interact to help on ID governance (proposed or
enforced).

Thanks, Matt

http://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau<https://profiles.google.com/Matt.Laurenceau>


On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Andrew C Goodall wrote:

> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> company creator.
>
> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Goodall
> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
> only by an authorized State Official.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Joe,
>  Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
> idea if
> BMC could pull it off.
> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
> in
> the acceptable range for developers.
>
> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
> form/workflow
> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
> is
> looking for a field id of 6722x.
> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
> interact with other objects in the system.
>
> ---
> John J. Reiser
> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> Senior Software Development Analyst
> Lockheed Martin - MS2
> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
> by
> me
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..
>
> Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate
> development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few
> customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few
> days..
> And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after
> that..
> Go figure..
>
> Joe
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups:
> public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> I remember that upgrade!
>
> Ahh, the good old days.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> David,
>
> There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere
> thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting
> non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that
> were
> done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my
> personal preference was never to us

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Andrew, you're an optimist.

536xx isn't a good range because it is the default.

For example, let's say I have a field, 'My Field" and I want to use it on 10 
forms spanning two applications.  If I use the same ID on every field and form, 
say 666x1, I can map fields in workflow using the automatic database id 
mapping feature.  I also know just from glancing at the id in workflow logs 
that it's a custom field.  If I have a system, I may even be able to figure out 
what the field does just by looking at the ID in a SQL or API log.

Now, let's say I use the randomly assigned BMC Database IDs in the 536xx 
range.  If you copy and paste the field from one form to another, the Database 
ID may already be in use on a form with other custom fields, or you may 
discover down the road that you need to add your field to another 
form/application, and it may already be taken.

Jennifer Meyer
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Andrew C Goodall
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:32 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!

I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
company creator.

Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
choice for custom fields - thanks.

Regards,

Andrew Goodall
Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?




E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an 
authorized state official.

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

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Rick Cook]

Well, the issue with creating a standard for this is that there are multiple
ways to do it effectively, none probably significantly better than the
others.

As to why the 536...* range isn't preferred, for me it is merely cosmetic.
Anything that starts with a 6 or higher means a custom field.  As to ranges,
you can separate those by application, developer, field type, form, etc.  I
have done it a few different ways, and it really depends on what system
works best for your team and that you have the will and the means to
enforce.  You could easily use the metatables to create a form that would
choose the next field IDs for you based on any formula you wished, or just
keep one master form with all of the custom fields on it, and copy all new
fields from that form to ensure consistent characteristics and attributes.
I would bet that there are one or more of the good Remedy utility programs
that could assist you with choosing the next field ID for a form.  Lots of
ways to skin that cat.

So which system you use isn't nearly as important as using one that works
for you.

Rick

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Andrew C Goodall wrote:

> It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!
>
> I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
> company creator.
>
> Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
> choice for custom fields - thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew Goodall
> Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
> a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
> each other, we are all using the same standard.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services
> Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
> North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
> only by an authorized State Official.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Joe,
>  Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
> idea if
> BMC could pull it off.
> The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
> TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
> MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
> When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
> into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
> in
> the acceptable range for developers.
>
> The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
> form/workflow
> combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
> is
> looking for a field id of 6722x.
> Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
> interact with other objects in the system.
>
> ---
> John J. Reiser
> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> Senior Software Development Analyst
> Lockheed Martin - MS2
> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
> by
> me
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..
>
> Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate
> development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few
> customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few
> days..
> And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after
> that..
> Go figure..
>
> Joe
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups:
> public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@A

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Andrew C Goodall]

It would be nice if BMC helped drive that effort!

I like the idea of the prefix - or perhaps some other flag to denote
company creator.

Can someone please explain why the default 536 range is not a good
choice for custom fields - thanks.

Regards,
 
Andrew Goodall
Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com  

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:26 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on
a development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with
each other, we are all using the same standard.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services 
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us
 
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
only by an authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Joe,
 Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great
idea if
BMC could pull it off.
The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still
in
the acceptable range for developers.

The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular
form/workflow
combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part
is
looking for a field id of 6722x.
Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
interact with other objects in the system.

--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
by
me 


-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..

Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate 
development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few 
customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few
days.. 
And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after
that.. 
Go figure..

Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

David,

There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere 
thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting 
non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that
were 
done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my 
personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field
(line,

box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for
those

kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your 
field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like
text 
fields..

So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999
range 
but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx...

Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee
yourself 
that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the
536,xxx,xxx 
in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization..
There

is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
deliberately..

Cheers

Joe

-Original Message-
From: David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsys

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

This thread is fascinating.  I think this may be the forum to decide on a 
development standard for Database IDs so when we share workflow with each 
other, we are all using the same standard.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services 
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us
 
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 9:20 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Joe,
 Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great idea if
BMC could pull it off.
The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still in
the acceptable range for developers.

The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular form/workflow
combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part is
looking for a field id of 6722x.
Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
interact with other objects in the system.

--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me 


-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..

Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate 
development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few 
customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few days.. 
And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after that.. 
Go figure..

Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

David,

There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere 
thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting 
non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were 
done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my 
personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line,

box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those

kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your 
field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text 
fields..

So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx...

Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself 
that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx 
in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There

is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
deliberately..

Cheers

Joe

-Original Message-
From: David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community 
have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting 
at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a

new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used 
for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf 

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Reiser, John J]

Joe,
 Re. your rant about field IDs needing alphas. That would be a great idea if
BMC could pull it off.
The range of ID numbers that I use a pulled from the telephone keypad.
TPAG forms all have ids that start 87240 - 87249
MRBC forms 67220 - 67229 etc
When I get a prefix that would be below 536870912 (that number in burned
into my memory) I add 1 as the left most digit 1536870912 which is still in
the acceptable range for developers.

The place this has failed me is when I want to reuse a modular form/workflow
combination and the key field ID starts 8724x and the modular part is
looking for a field id of 6722x.
Makes me want to rethink it and build everything as if it will always
interact with other objects in the system.

--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me 


-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:02 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..

Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate 
development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few 
customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few days.. 
And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after that.. 
Go figure..

Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

David,

There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere 
thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting 
non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were 
done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my 
personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line,

box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those

kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your 
field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text 
fields..

So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx...

Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself 
that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx 
in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There

is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
deliberately..

Cheers

Joe

-Original Message-
From: David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community 
have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting 
at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a

new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used 
for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.".
>
> We roll our own and use that range.
>
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> Office 813.978.2192
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of To

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[David Durling]

Also, having 9 numbers in a row might trigger false positives if you do a 
security scan on a system (like a PC containing def files) to try to detect 
United States social security numbers.  Seems like might have happened for me 
once.

So allowing alphabetical characters, or maybe using the 1,000,000,000 range 
(though it sounds from Jennifer like BMC's already started using the bottom of 
that a little) might avoid that.

David

David Durling
University of Georgia


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 4:42 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

**

That is a pretty sweet idea.  You could prefix field IDs like forms and 
workflow.
On Sep 8, 2011 10:00 AM, "Joe Martin D'Souza" 
mailto:jdso...@shyle.net>> wrote:
>
> Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a we bit..
>
> Instead of having just numerical ID's, they modified their internal meta data 
> structure a bit that Field ID's could accommodate characters as well.. Then 
> you could actually have meaningful Field ID's instead of having to come up 
> with some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges could 
> still be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to designing 
> 'Keyword' kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more possibilities..
>
> Joe
>
>
> From: Jason Miller
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
> Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the 
> consistency pays off later. I brought back a numbering scheme when I returned 
> to my current employer. We have have been using it now for 3 years and it is 
> paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and "foundation" forms.
>
> The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field ID 
> for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new field. 
> Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as 
> ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to 
> the clipboard). There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid 
> prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for 
> the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.
>
> Here are the number ranges we use.
> Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields
> Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A
>
> Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998
> Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998
> Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698
> Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 60001 298
> Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998
> Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998
> Views 60010 N/A
>
> Groups 120 129 9
>
> We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name 
> <600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01 
> <600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc. Right now 
> it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for 
> a while. What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio so 
> it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer 
> mailto:suzanpal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> **
> David,
>
> Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because that 
> is BMC's range. One never knows what the future brings. And even though your 
> custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use them 
> inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past biting 
> you in the ###.
>
> When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would nice 
> to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I assigned 
> ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the origination of 
> the data. But whatever plan you decide on it just needs to be uniform so you 
> can maintain your sanity. It's all just good practice and establishing a 
> habit.
>
> Good luck,
> Susan
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling 
> mailto:durl...@uga.edu>> wrote:
>
> **
> Thanks Mike & Susan,
>
>
>
> So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not 

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[Jason Miller]

That is a pretty sweet idea.  You could prefix field IDs like forms and
workflow.
On Sep 8, 2011 10:00 AM, "Joe Martin D'Souza" 
wrote:
>
> Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a we bit..
>
> Instead of having just numerical ID’s, they modified their internal meta
data structure a bit that Field ID’s could accommodate characters as well..
Then you could actually have meaningful Field ID’s instead of having to come
up with some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges
could still be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to
designing ‘Keyword’ kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more
possibilities..
>
> Joe
>
>
> From: Jason Miller
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
> Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but
the consistency pays off later. I brought back a numbering scheme when I
returned to my current employer. We have have been using it now for 3 years
and it is paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and
"foundation" forms.
>
> The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field
ID for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new
field. Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as
ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to
the clipboard). There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid
prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for
the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.
>
> Here are the number ranges we use.
> Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields
> Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A
>
> Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998
> Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998
> Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698
> Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 60001 298
> Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998
> Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998
> Views 60010 N/A
>
> Groups 120 129 9
>
> We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name
<600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01
<600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc. Right now
it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for
a while. What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio
so it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer 
wrote:
>
> **
> David,
>
> Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because
that is BMC's range. One never knows what the future brings. And even though
your custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use
them inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past
biting you in the ###.
>
> When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would
nice to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I
assigned ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the
origination of the data. But whatever plan you decide on it just needs to be
uniform so you can maintain your sanity. It's all just good practice and
establishing a habit.
>
> Good luck,
> Susan
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling  wrote:
>
> **
> Thanks Mike & Susan,
>
>
>
> So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any
special use. Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 is a convenient
range to maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the
system (unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 6).
>
>
>
> This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the
advantage of me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS
do it. I have run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or
something was tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so
I couldn’t just match based on ID), so I do see that advantage.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
> David Durling
>
> University of Georgia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM
>
>
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>
> **
>
> I agree - we don’t 

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

Nice find!  I hadn't read that one.  It is nice to have a list.

Just to add to it...  My eService uses for Virtual Chat (v7.1):

173
179
1005
1575
1576
1577
11107
1842067
300
80005000
200xx
240xx
260xx
301xx
302xx
301xx
536xx
800xx - 825xx  (the majority)
800xx
1000xx

Maybe we should start using 858xx, our area code?  I guess one thing to
keep in mind is that while not ideal it would most likely be OK to overlap
with a 3rd party's range.  You would only encounter issues on the forms
where the two apps integrate, if they do.

Jason
Hey!  Who turned out the lights? From San Diego, CA.

On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:25 PM, David Durling  wrote:

> **
>
> This topic also reminded me of a discussion about field ranges used by ITSM
> and some 3rd party vendors.  The post is a little old – from 2008, but
> there are some ranges listed by Christopher Strauss in the thread subject
> “Reserved Field Id Range for v 7.0.01”.
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks, everybody -
>
> ** **
>
> David
>
> ** **
>
> David Durling
>
> University of Georgia
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Jason Miller
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>  ** **
>
> ** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the
> consistency pays off later.  I brought back a numbering scheme when I
> returned to my current employer.  We have have been using it now for 3 years
> and it is paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and
> "foundation" forms.
>
>
> The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field
> ID for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new
> field.  Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as
> ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to
> the clipboard).  There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid
> prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for
> the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.
>
> Here are the number ranges we use.
>
>   *Range Type*
>
> *Starting*
>
> *Ending*
>
> *# of Fields*
>
> Dynamic Group Fields
>
> 60001
>
> N/A
>
> Data Fields (Saved)
>
> 600010001
>
> 600016999
>
> 6998
>
> Shared Data Fields (Saved)
>
> 600017001
>
> 600018999
>
> 1998
>
> Temp Fields (Display Only)
>
> 600019001
>
> 600019699
>
> 698
>
> Shared Temp Fields (Display Only)
>
> 600019701
>
> 60001
>
> 298
>
> Trim/page/button/column
>
> 600020001
>
> 600026999
>
> 6998
>
> Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column
>
> 600027001
>
> 60002
>
> 2998
>
> Views
>
> 60010
>
> N/A
>
> Groups
>
> 120
>
> 129
>
> 9
>
>
> We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name
> <600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01
> <600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc.  Right
> now it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app
> for a while.  What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev
> Studio so it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)
>
> Jason
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer 
> wrote:
>
> ** 
>
> David,
>
>  
>
> Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because
> that is BMC's range.  One never knows what the future brings.  And even
> though your custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to
> use them inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past
> biting you in the ###.  ** **
>
>  
>
> When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would
> nice to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I
> assigned ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the
> origination of the data.  But whatever plan  you decide on it just needs to
> be uniform so you can maintain your sanity.  It's all just good practice and
> establishing a habit.
>
>  
>
> Good luck,***

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[David Durling]

This topic also reminded me of a discussion about field ranges used by ITSM and 
some 3rd party vendors.  The post is a little old - from 2008, but there are 
some ranges listed by Christopher Strauss in the thread subject "Reserved Field 
Id Range for v 7.0.01".

Thanks, everybody -

David

David Durling
University of Georgia

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the 
consistency pays off later.  I brought back a numbering scheme when I returned 
to my current employer.  We have have been using it now for 3 years and it is 
paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and "foundation" forms.

The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field ID 
for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new field.  
Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as ARUtilities 
provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to the clipboard).  
There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid prototypes using the 
default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for the project used 
archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.

Here are the number ranges we use.
Range Type

Starting

Ending

# of Fields

Dynamic Group Fields

60001

N/A

Data Fields (Saved)

600010001

600016999

6998

Shared Data Fields (Saved)

600017001

600018999

1998

Temp Fields (Display Only)

600019001

600019699

698

Shared Temp Fields (Display Only)

600019701

60001

298

Trim/page/button/column

600020001

600026999

6998

Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column

600027001

60002

2998

Views

60010

N/A

Groups

120

129

9


We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name <600018048>, 
Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01 <600019701>, 
zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc.  Right now it is just a 
spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for a while.  What 
would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio so it 
automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)

Jason
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer 
mailto:suzanpal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
**
David,

Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because that is 
BMC's range.  One never knows what the future brings.  And even though your 
custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use them 
inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past biting you 
in the ###.

When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would nice to 
know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I assigned ID's 
based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the origination of the 
data.  But whatever plan  you decide on it just needs to be uniform so you can 
maintain your sanity.  It's all just good practice and establishing a habit.

Good luck,
Susan


On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling 
mailto:durl...@uga.edu>> wrote:
**
Thanks Mike & Susan,

So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special 
use.  Rather, it's just that 600xx-9 is a convenient range to 
maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the system 
(unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 6).

This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the advantage of 
me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS do it.  I have 
run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or something was 
tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so I couldn't just 
match based on ID), so I do see that advantage.

David

David Durling
University of Georgia


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of White, 
Michael W (Mike)
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**
I agree - we don't have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K).  No problem with 
the number of possible Field IDs.  Not even close.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
Office 813.978.2192

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]<mailto:[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]> On Behalf Of 
Susan Palmer
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Outside 

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Yup :-) I think that was when I first learnt the use of archgid..

Unfortunately we found it out at a customer that didn't have a separate 
development server.. Fortunately for them though, they had very few 
customizations that were lost and were able to redo it within a few days.. 
And they still didn't bother to invest in a development server after that.. 
Go figure..


Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:40 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza

Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

David,

There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere 
thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting 
non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were 
done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my 
personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line, 
box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those 
kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your 
field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text 
fields..


So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx...


Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself 
that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx 
in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There 
is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
deliberately..


Cheers

Joe

-Original Message-
From: David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community 
have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting 
at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a 
new form?


According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used 
for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.


David Durling
University of Georgia



-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

"I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
development.".

We roll our own and use that range.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
Office 813.978.2192

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

"One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
larger
than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
issue.  I
seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I
don't
recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by
an
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, S

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

I remember that upgrade!

Ahh, the good old days.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

David,

There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere
thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting
non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were
done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my
personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line,
box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those
kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your
field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text
fields..

So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range
but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx...

Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself
that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx
in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There
is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range
deliberately..

Cheers

Joe

-Original Message-
From: David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community
have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting
at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a
new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used
for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.".
>
> We roll our own and use that range.
>
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> Office 813.978.2192
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
> larger
> than that stump me. :)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
> issue.  I
> seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I
> don't
> recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
> ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
>
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by
> an
> authorized State Official.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Hello Listers,
> ARS 7.6.03
> MS SQL Server 2005
> VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
> I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
> followin

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning? (RANT)

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Sometimes I wish BMC changed this field ID structure just a we bit..

Instead of having just numerical ID’s, they modified their internal meta data 
structure a bit that Field ID’s could accommodate characters as well.. Then you 
could actually have meaningful Field ID’s instead of having to come up with 
some sort of code to choosing your next Field ID.. Reserved ranges could still 
be retained doing this and may even have the flexibility to designing ‘Keyword’ 
kind of reserved fields. It just may open up more possibilities..

Joe


From: Jason Miller 
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:35 PM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

** I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the 
consistency pays off later.  I brought back a numbering scheme when I returned 
to my current employer.  We have have been using it now for 3 years and it is 
paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and "foundation" forms.

The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field ID 
for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new field.  
Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as ARUtilities 
provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to the clipboard).  
There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid prototypes using the 
default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for the project used 
archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.

Here are the number ranges we use.
  Range Type Starting Ending # of Fields 
  Dynamic Group Fields 60001 N/A 
 
  Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998 
  Shared Data Fields (Saved) 600017001 600018999 1998 
  Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001 600019699 698 
  Shared Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 60001 298 
  Trim/page/button/column 600020001 600026999 6998 
  Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001 60002 2998 
  Views 60010 N/A 
 
  Groups 120 129 9 

We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name <600018048>, 
Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01 <600019701>, 
zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc.  Right now it is just a 
spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app for a while.  What 
would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev Studio so it 
automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)

Jason


On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer  wrote:

  ** 
  David,

  Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because that 
is BMC's range.  One never knows what the future brings.  And even though your 
custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use them 
inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past biting you 
in the ###.  

  When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would nice 
to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I assigned 
ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the origination of the 
data.  But whatever plan  you decide on it just needs to be uniform so you can 
maintain your sanity.  It's all just good practice and establishing a habit.

  Good luck,
  Susan

   
  On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling  wrote:

** 
Thanks Mike & Susan,



So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any 
special use.  Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 is a convenient range 
to maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the system 
(unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 6).



This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the 
advantage of me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS do 
it.  I have run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or 
something was tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so I 
couldn’t just match based on ID), so I do see that advantage.



David



David Durling

University of Georgia







From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
    Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM 


To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?


** 

I agree - we don’t have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K).  No problem 
with the number of possible Field IDs.  Not even close.



Mike White

EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com

Office 813.978.2192



From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 A

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Reiser, John J]

Ashish,
I am running Dev Studio 7.6.04 SP1 in Base Mode.
Everything I do is custom built. I have always tried to use a custom block of 
Field ID numbers based on a white paper I read many years ago by Barry 
Lindstrom.
It was strange to be told
"Hey, you're using the field ID number in the correct range, Way 2 Go!"
Thanks,
--- 
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by me

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ashish Thakur
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:38 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hi John,
Can you please check your Devstudio version from Help~About menu ? 7.6.04 
Devstudio does throw this warning in Base Development mode when you create a 
field with id outside BMC reserved range.


Regards,
Ashish

___
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"


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Jason Miller]

I agreed that it takes more work to keep track of your field IDs but the
consistency pays off later.  I brought back a numbering scheme when I
returned to my current employer.  We have have been using it now for 3 years
and it is paying off on how easy it is to share common workflow and
"foundation" forms.

The trick is to get into the habit of keeping track of the last used field
ID for the type of field you and adjusting the ID before you save a new
field.  Being able to sort on Field ID/Name in Dev Studio helps as well as
ARUtilities provides a quick list (and is easy to copy the field number to
the clipboard).  There have been a few POCs where we have created rapid
prototypes using the default IDs and then later when we got the go ahead for
the project used archgid and a CSV file exported from ARUtilities.

Here are the number ranges we use.
   *Range Type* *Starting* *Ending* *# of Fields*  Dynamic Group Fields
60001 N/A
 Data Fields (Saved) 600010001 600016999 6998  Shared Data Fields (Saved)
600017001 600018999 1998  Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019001
600019699 698  Shared
Temp Fields (Display Only) 600019701 60001 298  Trim/page/button/column
600020001 600026999 6998  Shared Buttons Trim/page/button/column 600027001
60002 2998  Views 60010 N/A
 Groups 120 129 9
We also have a fairly long list of common field such as First Name
<600018048>, Last Name <600018049>, Serial Number <600017503>, zTmpCharVar01
<600019701>, zTmpIntVar01 <600019721>, txtHeader <600027008>, etc.  Right
now it is just a spreadsheet but I have been wanting to make it a Remedy app
for a while.  What would be really cool is to integrate the app with Dev
Studio so it automatically picks the next ID based on the field type. :)

Jason

On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Susan Palmer  wrote:

> **
> David,
>
> Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because
> that is BMC's range.  One never knows what the future brings.  And even
> though your custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to
> use them inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past
> biting you in the ###.
>
> When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would
> nice to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I
> assigned ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the
> origination of the data.  But whatever plan  you decide on it just needs to
> be uniform so you can maintain your sanity.  It's all just good practice and
> establishing a habit.
>
> Good luck,
> Susan
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling  wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>> Thanks Mike & Susan,
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any
>> special use.  Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 is a convenient
>> range to maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the
>> system (unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 6).
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the
>> advantage of me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS
>> do it.  I have run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or
>> something was tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so
>> I couldn’t just match based on ID), so I do see that advantage.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> David
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> David Durling****
>>
>> University of Georgia
>>
>> 
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
>> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *White, Michael W (Mike)
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM
>>
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>
>>   ** **
>>
>> ** 
>>
>> I agree - we don’t have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K).  No problem
>> with the number of possible Field IDs.  Not even close.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Mike White
>>
>> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
>>
>> Office 813.978.2192
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
>> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Susan Palmer
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** 
>>
>>

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

David,

There was one version, I think when moving from 4 to 4.5 or somewhere 
thereabouts, where Remedy Engineering accidently used the starting 
non-reserved range 536,xxx,xxx that messed up some customizations that were 
done using that starting non reserved field ID's. Since that time my 
personal preference was never to use that, even if it is a trim field (line, 
box, text) you are creating.. Until then I happily used that range for those 
kind of fields. With the introduction of shared workflow, choosing your 
field ID's became even more important even for some trim fields like text 
fields..


So my personal preference was to use the 800,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
but I see nothing wrong with starting from 600,xxx,xxx...


Choosing this higher number deliberately, you can almost guarantee yourself 
that an accidental intrusion by BMC Softwares engineers on the 536,xxx,xxx 
in any future patches or releases will not impact your customization.. There 
is hardly a chance they would use the 600,xxx,xxx to 999,999,999 range 
deliberately..


Cheers

Joe

-Original Message- 
From: David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community 
have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting 
at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a 
new form?


According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used 
for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.


David Durling
University of Georgia



-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

"I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
development.".

We roll our own and use that range.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
Office 813.978.2192

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

"One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers 
larger

than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the 
issue.  I

seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I 
don't

recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by 
an

authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the 
BMC

reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved 
field ids

but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by 
me 


___

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Susan Palmer]

David,

Personally I'd stay out of the less than 6 range simply because that
is BMC's range.  One never knows what the future brings.  And even though
your custom forms may never be 'in' a BMC Application you may want to use
them inconjunction with one and you don't want any gotchas from the past
biting you in the ###.

When I first started this implementation 9 years ago I thought it would nice
to know where the 'home' location of a field (what form) was and I assigned
ID's based on the field's 'home' location so that I knew the origination of
the data.  But whatever plan  you decide on it just needs to be uniform so
you can maintain your sanity.  It's all just good practice and establishing
a habit.

Good luck,
Susan


On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Durling  wrote:

> **
>
> Thanks Mike & Susan,
>
> ** **
>
> So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any
> special use.  Rather, it’s just that 600xx-9 is a convenient
> range to maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the
> system (unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 6).
>
> ** **
>
> This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the
> advantage of me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS
> do it.  I have run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or
> something was tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so
> I couldn’t just match based on ID), so I do see that advantage.
>
> ** **
>
> David
>
> ** **
>
> David Durling
>
> University of Georgia
>
> 
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *White, Michael W (Mike)
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM
>
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
>   ** **
>
> ** 
>
> I agree - we don’t have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K).  No problem
> with the number of possible Field IDs.  Not even close.
>
> ** **
>
> Mike White
>
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
>
> Office 813.978.2192****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Susan Palmer
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> ** **
>
> ** 
>
> I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through
> 9 can provide!  Even for BMC that might be  a challenge.
>
>  
>
> Since we're a custom shop I always make sure the field ID for fields used
> on multiple forms are the same.  ARUtilities helps me easily see what field
> ID is available across several forms. 
>
>  
>
> Susan
>
>
>
>  
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, White, Michael W (Mike) <
> michael.wh...@verizon.com> wrote:
>
> We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict
> and preserve ability to share workflow later.
>
> 536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard.  Two different kinds
> of fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id.  Later
> copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the
> new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use.
>
> Record ID is always Field ID 1.  Similarly, where we have to keep instances
> of a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our case), we use
> the same Field ID.  We use a cross-reference product to plan for changes,
> which reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming conventions).  We
> can easily find like fields by their ID or name.
>
>
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> Office 813.978.2192
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community
> have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting
> at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a
> new form?
>
> According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be
> used for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.
>
> David Durling
> University of Georgia
>
>
> > ---

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[David Durling]

Thanks Mike & Susan,

So it sounds like the 536xx-599xx range is not reserved for any special 
use.  Rather, it's just that 600xx-9 is a convenient range to 
maintain custom IDs in that is unlikely to be auto-assigned by the system 
(unless someone actually added enough IDs to reach 6).

This is a one-developer custom setup, and I am trying to weigh the advantage of 
me manually assigning IDs over the convenience of letting ARS do it.  I have 
run into the situation where trying to map a push fields or something was 
tedious because I had not kept consistent use of field ids (so I couldn't just 
match based on ID), so I do see that advantage.

David

David Durling
University of Georgia



From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:07 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**
I agree - we don't have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K).  No problem with 
the number of possible Field IDs.  Not even close.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
Office 813.978.2192

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]<mailto:[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]> On Behalf Of 
Susan Palmer
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**
I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through 
9 can provide!  Even for BMC that might be  a challenge.

Since we're a custom shop I always make sure the field ID for fields used on 
multiple forms are the same.  ARUtilities helps me easily see what field ID is 
available across several forms.

Susan



On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, White, Michael W (Mike) 
mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>> wrote:
We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict and 
preserve ability to share workflow later.

536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard.  Two different kinds of 
fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id.  Later 
copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the 
new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use.

Record ID is always Field ID 1.  Similarly, where we have to keep instances of 
a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our case), we use the 
same Field ID.  We use a cross-reference product to plan for changes, which 
reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming conventions).  We can easily 
find like fields by their ID or name.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
Office 813.978.2192

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of David 
Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community have 
chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting at the 
536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 
can be used for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of White, 
> Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.".
>
> We roll our own and use that range.
>
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
> Office 813.978.2192
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Logan, 
> Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Tommy 
> Morris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
>

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[White, Michael W (Mike)]

I agree - we don't have 399,999,999 fields (closer to 22K).  No problem with 
the number of possible Field IDs.  Not even close.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
Office 813.978.2192

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:53 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

**
I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through 
9 can provide!  Even for BMC that might be  a challenge.

Since we're a custom shop I always make sure the field ID for fields used on 
multiple forms are the same.  ARUtilities helps me easily see what field ID is 
available across several forms.

Susan



On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, White, Michael W (Mike) 
mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>> wrote:
We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict and 
preserve ability to share workflow later.

536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard.  Two different kinds of 
fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id.  Later 
copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the 
new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use.

Record ID is always Field ID 1.  Similarly, where we have to keep instances of 
a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our case), we use the 
same Field ID.  We use a cross-reference product to plan for changes, which 
reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming conventions).  We can easily 
find like fields by their ID or name.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
Office 813.978.2192

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of David 
Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community have 
chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting at the 
536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 
can be used for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of White, 
> Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.".
>
> We roll our own and use that range.
>
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com<mailto:michael.wh...@verizon.com>
> Office 813.978.2192
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Logan, 
> Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Tommy 
> Morris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers 
> larger
> than that stump me. :)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Meyer, 
> Jennifer L
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the 
> issue.  I
> seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't
> recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.
>
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Susan Palmer]

I want to know who is going to use more fields than range 6 through
9 can provide!  Even for BMC that might be  a challenge.

Since we're a custom shop I always make sure the field ID for fields used on
multiple forms are the same.  ARUtilities helps me easily see what field ID
is available across several forms.

Susan



On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, White, Michael W (Mike) <
michael.wh...@verizon.com> wrote:

> We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict
> and preserve ability to share workflow later.
>
> 536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard.  Two different kinds
> of fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id.  Later
> copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the
> new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use.
>
> Record ID is always Field ID 1.  Similarly, where we have to keep instances
> of a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our case), we use
> the same Field ID.  We use a cross-reference product to plan for changes,
> which reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming conventions).  We
> can easily find like fields by their ID or name.
>
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> Office 813.978.2192
>
> -Original Message-
>  From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
>
> Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community
> have chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting
> at the 536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a
> new form?
>
> According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be
> used for ARS 7.1 and 7.5.
>
> David Durling
> University of Georgia
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >
> > "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> > development.".
> >
> > We roll our own and use that range.
> >
> > Mike White
> > EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> > Office 813.978.2192
> >
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >
> > "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >
> > Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
> larger
> > than that stump me. :)
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
> > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> > Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> >
> > Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
> issue.  I
> > seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> > development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I
> don't
> > recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.
> >
> > Jennifer Meyer
> > Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> > State of North Carolina
> > Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM
> &
> > ITAM Services
> > Office: 919-754-6543
> > ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> > jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> > http://its.state.nc.us
> >
> > E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
> North
> > Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by
> an
> > authorized State Official.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
&g

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[White, Michael W (Mike)]

We reserve ranges of field IDs (> 600M) by application to avoid conflict and 
preserve ability to share workflow later.

536M range (system-generated) is risky in this regard.  Two different kinds of 
fields on two different forms could be assigned the same id.  Later 
copying/pasting a field onto a new form, such as to add functionality to the 
new form, could conflict if the id is already in-use.

Record ID is always Field ID 1.  Similarly, where we have to keep instances of 
a kind of field (Nodename, Site-ID, and many others in our case), we use the 
same Field ID.  We use a cross-reference product to plan for changes, which 
reserved Field IDs helps with (as do field naming conventions).  We can easily 
find like fields by their ID or name.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
Office 813.978.2192

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:43 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community have 
chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting at the 
536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used for 
ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.".
> 
> We roll our own and use that range.
> 
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> Office 813.978.2192
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers 
> larger
> than that stump me. :)
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the 
> issue.  I
> seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't
> recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
> ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
> 
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
> authorized State Official.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> Hello Listers,
> ARS 7.6.03
> MS SQL Server 2005
> VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
> I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
> following response when I create fields.
> "You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
> reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
> I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved field 
> ids
> but outside?
> Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
> The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199
> 
> Thanks,
> ---
> John J. Reiser
> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> Senior Software De

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[David Durling]

Is starting at 600,000,000 just a convention people in the ARS community have 
chosen, or is there a real risk of running into a problem by starting at the 
536,xxx,xxx range the system will use by default if you're creating a new form?

According to KA315200, a field range of 536870913 to 2147483647 can be used for 
ARS 7.1 and 7.5.

David Durling
University of Georgia


> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of White, Michael W (Mike)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> "I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.".
> 
> We roll our own and use that range.
> 
> Mike White
> EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
> Office 813.978.2192
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> "One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers 
> larger
> than that stump me. :)
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the 
> issue.  I
> seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom
> development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't
> recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.
> 
> Jennifer Meyer
> Remedy Technical Support Specialist
> State of North Carolina
> Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
> ITAM Services
> Office: 919-754-6543
> ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
> jennifer.me...@nc.gov
> http://its.state.nc.us
> 
> E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
> Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
> authorized State Official.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?
> 
> Hello Listers,
> ARS 7.6.03
> MS SQL Server 2005
> VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
> I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
> following response when I create fields.
> "You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
> reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
> I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved field 
> ids
> but outside?
> Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
> The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199
> 
> Thanks,
> ---
> John J. Reiser
> Remedy Developer/Administrator
> Senior Software Development Analyst
> Lockheed Martin - MS2
> The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
> Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by me
> 
> 
> 
> __
> __
> ___
> 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"
> 
> __
> _
> 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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Such changes where values overlap, between individual parameters in the ar.h 
file has never happened to the best of my knowledge..


Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:47 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

But BMC can change ar.h at any time, without warning, like during the next 
upgrade.


Jennifer Meyer
When I die, I want to go to Theory.  Everything works in Theory.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ben Chernys

Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:38 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I'm afraid BMC would have to go quite far to get to infinity.  Especially
since a field id is limited to a 32 bit integer - from ar.h:

   typedef ARULong32 ARInternalId;/* structure to hold an internal
id */

Infinity always makes me smile!

Cheers
Ben Chernys

Senior Software Architect
Software Tool House Inc.
Web: www.softwaretoolhouse.com





-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: September-07-11 18:25
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Honestly, I can't fathom who needs 1 billion numbers, but BMC has been using
1,000,000,161 for Request IDs lately and 1,000,000,082 for Company, so I'd
guess they're headed to infinity.

If you're in their way, you might get overwritten.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
larger than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
issue.  I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for
custom development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but
I don't recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me

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



E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an 
authorized state official.


___
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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

But BMC can change ar.h at any time, without warning, like during the next 
upgrade.

Jennifer Meyer
When I die, I want to go to Theory.  Everything works in Theory.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ben Chernys
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:38 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

I'm afraid BMC would have to go quite far to get to infinity.  Especially
since a field id is limited to a 32 bit integer - from ar.h:

typedef ARULong32 ARInternalId;/* structure to hold an internal
id */

Infinity always makes me smile!

Cheers
Ben Chernys

Senior Software Architect
Software Tool House Inc.
Web: www.softwaretoolhouse.com





-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: September-07-11 18:25
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Honestly, I can't fathom who needs 1 billion numbers, but BMC has been using
1,000,000,161 for Request IDs lately and 1,000,000,082 for Company, so I'd
guess they're headed to infinity.

If you're in their way, you might get overwritten.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
larger than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
issue.  I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for
custom development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but
I don't recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me

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



E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an 
authorized state official.

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

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Ben Chernys]

I'm afraid BMC would have to go quite far to get to infinity.  Especially
since a field id is limited to a 32 bit integer - from ar.h:

typedef ARULong32 ARInternalId;/* structure to hold an internal
id */

Infinity always makes me smile!

Cheers
Ben Chernys

Senior Software Architect
Software Tool House Inc.
Web: www.softwaretoolhouse.com





-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: September-07-11 18:25
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Honestly, I can't fathom who needs 1 billion numbers, but BMC has been using
1,000,000,161 for Request IDs lately and 1,000,000,082 for Company, so I'd
guess they're headed to infinity.

If you're in their way, you might get overwritten.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
larger than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
issue.  I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for
custom development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but
I don't recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM &
ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me

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

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[White, Michael W (Mike)]

"I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom 
development.".

We roll our own and use that range.

Mike White
EMail michael.wh...@verizon.com
Office 813.978.2192

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Logan, Kelly
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

"One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers larger 
than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the issue.  
I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom 
development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't 
recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM 
Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us
 
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the 
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC 
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved field 
ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by me 




___
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"

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

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Logan, Kelly]

"One. . .Two. . .I think you're right. . ."

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers larger 
than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the issue.  
I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom 
development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't 
recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM 
Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us
 
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the 
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC 
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved field 
ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by me 




___
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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Joe Martin D'Souza]

Is there any reason why you want to use that high a range? I understand if 
you have field ID conventions internally for development by breaking up the 
9 digit numbers to subsets to indicate form/schema ID, type of field, data 
etc, but even with a few of those conventions to keep your development 
effort very organized, a 9 digit number would be more than sufficient I 
would think?


BMC does have a high range limit, just do not recall what that hard cap is 
as it is somewhere in the 10 digit range..


You might have future problems creating fields with those high range 
numbers, if BMC decides they have exhausted their lower reserved range 
limits and decide to go on the higher ones. If possible I'd recommend you 
back out of that range and come back to somewhat a reasonably lower range 
between the 6 to 9 mark.. I wouldn't even go to the 
10 range although you do find some BMC created fields in that range. 
Unless off course you need to copy one of their fields and share some of 
their workflow to leverage some OTB functions..


Joe

-Original Message- 
From: Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM Newsgroups: 
public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
--- 
John J. Reiser

Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me



___
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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Ashish Thakur]

Hi John,
Can you please check your Devstudio version from Help~About menu ? 7.6.04 
Devstudio does throw this warning in Base Development mode when you create a 
field with id outside BMC reserved range.


Regards,
Ashish

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

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[LJ LongWing]

John,
Unfortunately I haven't seen anything about it.  I think that BMC has gone
to a 'white list' instead of a 'black list' approach for their field id
warningsthey apparently want everyone to create fields with the range
they have now designated as ones for customers to createnot sure.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 10:03 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me 




___
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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Honestly, I can't fathom who needs 1 billion numbers, but BMC has been using 
1,000,000,161 for Request IDs lately and 1,000,000,082 for Company, so I'd 
guess they're headed to infinity.

If you're in their way, you might get overwritten.

Jennifer Meyer

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Tommy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
larger than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
issue.  I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for
custom development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use,
but I don't recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM
& ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
only by an authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the
BMC reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
by me




___
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"



E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an 
authorized state official.

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

Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Tommy Morris]

Yeah, I meant 600 million. I still have trouble counting to 5 so numbers
larger than that stump me. :)

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:19 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the
issue.  I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for
custom development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use,
but I don't recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM
& ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us
 
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
only by an authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the
BMC reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
---
John J. Reiser
Remedy Developer/Administrator
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MS2
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
by me 




___
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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Tommy Morris]

The range of ID's that you should use are 6,000,000 - 6,999,999 (I
believe that is the full range). This is the range that is "reserved"
for OOB fields. Any ID outside of that range could be overwritten by BMC
during a patch/ upgrade.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:03 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the
BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased
by
me 




___
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: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Meyer, Jennifer L]

Huh.  I suspect it's the number of digits in your ID that's causing the issue.  
I seem to recall that 600,000,000 to 999,999,999 is reserved for custom 
development.  Field IDs 599,999,999 and below are for BMC's use, but I don't 
recall anything about using IDs above 1,000,000,000.

Jennifer Meyer
Remedy Technical Support Specialist
State of North Carolina
Office of Information Technology Services 
Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services
Office: 919-754-6543
ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000
jennifer.me...@nc.gov
http://its.state.nc.us
 
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North 
Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an 
authorized State Official.

-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Reiser, John J
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: "Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me 



___
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"

"Outside of Reserved Range" warning?

[Reiser, John J]

Hello Listers,
ARS 7.6.03
MS SQL Server 2005
VMWare Windows 2003 Enterprise
I've been working in the Dev Studio for a while and I keep getting the
following response when I create fields.
"You have specified an id for the following fields which is outside the BMC
reserved range. Do you want to continue?"
I could see a warning for creating a field inside the range of reserved
field ids but outside?
Is there a config setting in Dev Studio to stop this message?
The field ids that I use are all between 1,587,700,000 and 1,587,711,199

Thanks,
--- 
John J. Reiser 
Remedy Developer/Administrator 
Senior Software Development Analyst 
Lockheed Martin - MS2 
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long. 
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by
me 



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


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature