blocking the transaction to release manually the Purchase Req uisition

[Felix Hassine]

> The disadvantage is of course that you only see WF-BATCH in the change
documents of the PR.
 
Patrick,
 
The "trick" exposed by Jocelyn recently resolves that Change Doc issue
(option 1).
I enclose the text below. jocelyn's solution is for POs, but can be extended
to any other such object (PR, Invoices, etc..). With this solution you will
have the higest person who approved the PR instead of WF-BATCH.
 
Best regards,
 
Felix
 
 
From: Dart, Jocelyn [mailto:jocelyn.dart at sap.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 4:59 PM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Replace WFBATCH in document change history
 
 
HI Ty,
There are basically two (2) options:
 
1) Make the task that calls BAPI_PO_RELEASE a DIALOG task - i.e. set the
background processing
flag off, and make sure the advance with dialog flag is on - that way the
release will be run under the
dialog user of the previous step without them actually intervening.
The downside of this is that they need the authority to release the p.o.
directly in their authorization
as their authority's will be used by the BAPI.
....
-----Original Message-----
From: Susan R. Keohan [mailto:skeohan at MIT.EDU]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 8:57 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Fwd: RE: blocking the transaction to release manually the
Purchase Req uisition
 
 
Forwarded on behalf of Patrick.deValensartSchoenmaeckers at PMIN
TL.COM...
 
>Felipe,
>
>I have the same requirements in my company. We solved it the following way
:
>the user only execute decision tasks (with two possible decisions : approve
>or reject). If the user chooses to approve, the next step is the release of
>the PR in background. That step is done with user WF-BATCH, which has
>authorization SAP_ALL. Therefore, you can remove the release authorisations
>fromall other users. The disadvantage is of course that you only see
>WF-BATCH in the change documents of the PR.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
>Patrick de Valensart
>PHilip Morris SpA
>Roma
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Felipe Uribe - SAP [mailto:jfelipe_uribed at hotmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:54 AM
>To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: blocking the transaction to release manually the Purchase
>Req uisition
>
>
>Hi Mr Tomasz,
>
>Thanks a lot for your answer.
>
>It's pretty funny because this situation in this project is unusual; as
some
>of the people knows (some projects), the user has facilities to make
>transactions easier than regularly they do (using Workflow) using the
>regular menu, but some of them just don't want to take the risk to use new
>things or they just doesn't want to use those facilities, but the rule in
>the company is to use Workflow and that's it, the user is not allowed to
>make manual release of this document.
>
>Anyway, the solution that you send is completely valid and if I have no
more
>chances to solve my problem, I'll let it done in this way, but the fact is
>unfortunately, this is the client request, so if you know the way to block
>it, I appreciate it a lot.
>
>Thank very much.
>
>Best regards
>
>Felipe Uribe
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Zmudzin,Tomasz,VEVEY,GL-DS/DM" <Tomasz.Zmudzin at nestle.com>
>To: <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 11:18 PM
>Subject: Re: blocking the transaction to release manually the Purchase Req
>uisition
>
>
> > Felipe,
> >
> > apart from the technical issues -- if the user is allowed to release the
> > document within workflow, why shouldn't he/she be allowed to release it
> > manually?
> >
> > Please remember that WF is basically a coordination tool supporting the
> > process / facilitating it. Should a user prefer to go  via standalone
> > transaction, let him do it and make your workflow react to this
>accordingly.
> > This should NOT change your control over the process or have an impact
on
> > your process reporting.
> >
> > To react to purchase requisition approvals / rejections, insert into
your
> > workflow wait steps for the BUS2009.Released / BUS2009.Rejected events.
To
> > react to purchase order releases wait for BUS2012.Released. If you do it
>in
> > a fork like this:
> >
> >           Previous task
> >                 !
> >                 !
> >     fork: 1 of 2 needed to complete
> >     !                            !
> >     !                            !
> >  wait for event               "release" task
> >     !                            !
> >     !                            !
> >     end of fork (will be reached when one of the tasks is finished)
> >                 !
> >                 !
> >            (remaining tasks)
> >
> > you'll have the workflow request the release the standard way (right
>branch)
> > and CANCEL that request if data is released outside workflow, proceeding
>to
> > the "remaining tasks".
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Tomasz
> >
> >
> > P.S. For your objects it will be a bit tougher; you need to check the
> > release codes that have been used. In the "Wait for event" you can
capture
> > them in a container element. You can loop at that step until the "right"
> > release code is captured.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Felipe Uribe - SAP [mailto:jfelipe_uribed at hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 12:40 AM
> > To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > Subject: blocking the transaction to release manually the Purchase
> > Requisition
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Everybody,
> >
> >
> >
> > I have developed a WF to release the Purchase Requisition, nothing
special
> > but I have a doubts about the permissions to access the transaction to
> > release the document manually ME54, I mean, The User which is gonna
>approve
> > the document will have to make it using Workflow and Workflow uses the
> > transaction ME54, same transaction to release it manually.
> >
> >
> >
> > Te question is how could I block this transaction to avoid the user to
use
> > it manually but I can't block it because Workflow is gonna call this
> > transaction in the method.
> >
> >
> >
> > There is any possibility using the authorizations or something in the
> > profile??
> >
> >  ....Idem with Purchase Order
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
> >