Task stalled when WF triggered from Portal
Tuan Huynh
tuan.huynh at alcatel.com
Tue Jan 10 21:15:00 EST 2006
Hi Folks,
I have a WF that starts properly via BUS7051 event created. When I
simulated the triggering within R/3
Using SWUE, my first task which is a background task started and completed
properly, however, when It is
Triggered through the Portal, this task gets in a "in process" or "started"
status and it just sits there.
It seems waiting for something.... Which of course stalled the WF. Testing
of the method invoved works
Just fine. I'm running out of idea on where to check...The event started
properly, the WF started properly,
When this background task started, it doesn't go further than "in
process"...
Any help is muchly appreciated.
Thanks,
Tuan Huynh
Tuan.huynh at alcatel.com
-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf Of
sap-wug-request at mit.edu
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:50 AM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 14, Issue 18
Send SAP-WUG mailing list submissions to
sap-wug at mit.edu
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sap-wug-request at mit.edu
You can reach the person managing the list at
sap-wug-owner at mit.edu
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of SAP-WUG digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Role resolution using responsibilities (Mike Pokraka)
2. How to access ad-hoc objects in class methods (Mike Pokraka)
3. RE: Role resolution using responsibilities (Alon Raskin)
4. RE: Role resolution using responsibilities (Mike Pokraka)
5. RSWUWFML2 - External mail notification (Balasubramanian)
6. Workflow Start Transactions vs Start Forms (Munday,Sherie J.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:45:57 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Mike Pokraka" <wug.replies at workflowconnections.com>
Subject: Re: Role resolution using responsibilities
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<50705.194.215.164.125.1136893557.squirrel at secure.workflowconnections.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Hi Akshay,
Indicator: Personal Rules
Rules with responsibilities can be personal or function-based. In the
case of personal rules, responsibilities are only relevant if users or
persons are assigned directly. In the case of function-based rules,
responsibilities are inherited along the organizational structure.
In other words, personal means you need to assign the agents directly, not
using org units or whatever. I have no idea why it's there, never used it.
Possibly to force people to assign individual users instead of getting lazy
and assigning a whole org unit.
Cheers
Mike
akshay.bhagwat at wipro.com wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> I have doubt related to one of the check box while creating the role
> using responsibilities.
> Pls. let me know the significance of check box for - " Personal role"
> i.e when to use it and when not relevant.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Akshay
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this electronic message and any
> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
>
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
> The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
> transmitted by this email.
>
> www.wipro.com_______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:10:21 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Mike Pokraka" <wug.replies at workflowconnections.com>
Subject: How to access ad-hoc objects in class methods
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Message-ID:
<14863.194.215.164.125.1136895021.squirrel at secure.workflowconnections.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
G'Day folks,
Simple question: How can one access Ad Hoc objects of a task in a
class-based method?
In traditional BOR methods, "SWC_GET_ELEMENT container
<name-in-calling-workflow>..." does the trick, but class methods have no
container. So where is it?
Cheers
Mike Pokraka
Senior Consultant
Workflow Connections Ltd.
Mobile: +44 (0)7786 910 855
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:15:47 -0500
From: "Alon Raskin" <araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
Subject: RE: Role resolution using responsibilities
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<30DFBDC75CD5494CBE4C4D408251BF0307144F98 at ms07.mse2.exchange.ms>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
It's a funny one Mike because I always considered it bad practice to assign
User IDs directly to a responsibility. I would be interested to hear from
anyone else as to why you would want to take this approach.
Regards,
Alon Raskin
e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com <mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
p: +1 207 409 4983 (please note new number)
f: +61 3 8610 1239
w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
________________________________
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu on behalf of Mike Pokraka
Sent: Tue 1/10/2006 06:45
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: Re: Role resolution using responsibilities
Hi Akshay,
Indicator: Personal Rules
Rules with responsibilities can be personal or function-based. In the
case of personal rules, responsibilities are only relevant if users or
persons are assigned directly. In the case of function-based rules,
responsibilities are inherited along the organizational structure.
In other words, personal means you need to assign the agents directly, not
using org units or whatever. I have no idea why it's there, never used it.
Possibly to force people to assign individual users instead of getting lazy
and assigning a whole org unit.
Cheers
Mike
akshay.bhagwat at wipro.com wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> I have doubt related to one of the check box while creating the role
> using responsibilities.
> Pls. let me know the significance of check box for - " Personal role"
> i.e when to use it and when not relevant.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Akshay
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this electronic message and any
> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
>
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
> The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
> transmitted by this email.
>
> www.wipro.com_______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 6255 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060110/6d07f6d1/attac
hment-0001.bin
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:53:22 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Mike Pokraka" <wug.replies at workflowconnections.com>
Subject: RE: Role resolution using responsibilities
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<40614.194.215.164.125.1136904802.squirrel at secure.workflowconnections.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Generally bad practice yes, but I've had a few be exceptions. Anything where
a person is more important than their position.
If Ziggy Stardust should buy property on the Moon because he is an expert on
Lunar geography then the responsibilty is his regardless of position in the
org chart and it should follow him if he moves.
Another is our old favourite "it always works like this except for
department Y where Joe does it" (of course falling into the 'bad practice'
category). More valid is perhaps the exception case where departments refer
to themselves (everything goes to org unit XYZ except if it's raised by them
then it should be Mr. Smith).
Still haven't figured out why we need a tickbox to PREVENT anyone using org
units.... hence I've never used it.
Cheers
Mike
Alon Raskin wrote:
> It's a funny one Mike because I always considered it bad practice to
> assign User IDs directly to a responsibility. I would be interested to
> hear from anyone else as to why you would want to take this approach.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alon Raskin
> e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com <mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com>
> p: +1 207 409 4983 (please note new number)
> f: +61 3 8610 1239
> w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu on behalf of Mike Pokraka
> Sent: Tue 1/10/2006 06:45
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
> Subject: Re: Role resolution using responsibilities
>
>
>
> Hi Akshay,
>
> Indicator: Personal Rules
>
> Rules with responsibilities can be personal or function-based. In the
> case of personal rules, responsibilities are only relevant if users or
> persons are assigned directly. In the case of function-based rules,
> responsibilities are inherited along the organizational structure.
>
> In other words, personal means you need to assign the agents directly,
> not using org units or whatever. I have no idea why it's there, never used
it.
> Possibly to force people to assign individual users instead of getting
> lazy and assigning a whole org unit.
>
> Cheers
> Mike
>
> akshay.bhagwat at wipro.com wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>> I have doubt related to one of the check box while creating the role
>> using responsibilities.
>> Pls. let me know the significance of check box for - " Personal role"
>> i.e when to use it and when not relevant.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Akshay
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The information contained in this electronic message and any
>> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
>> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
>> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
>> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
>> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any
>> attachments.
>>
>> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
>> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
>> The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
>> transmitted by this email.
>>
>> www.wipro.com_______________________________________________
>> SAP-WUG mailing list
>> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:16:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Balasubramanian <pbala_1996 at yahoo.com>
Subject: RSWUWFML2 - External mail notification
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Message-ID: <20060110161621.68340.qmail at web51409.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi All,
Best wishes for the New Year.
I have a question regarding the RSWUWFML2, which send a notification about
a workitem to the external mail. For some reasons, it takes a while to reach
the external mail. Is there a way, we can improve the speed of delivery from
the SAP Server to external email server.
Please write your ideas.
Thanks in advance,
Bala.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands
ASAP.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060110/bd966b83/attac
hment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:50:12 -0500
From: "Munday,Sherie J." <MUNDAYSJ at airproducts.com>
Subject: Workflow Start Transactions vs Start Forms
To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<43ADE045B291B240BAA1252FF11E8313052C2191 at us0368exmp.america.apci.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello Fellow Workflowers,
We are upgrading from 4.6C to ECC 5.0. Our start transactions were not
carried over to the new version of the workflows. I am trying to recreate
the start transactions using Start Forms. My problem is that the old Start
Transaction bound the object into the workflow, and the Start Form does not.
For example, if I want to have the user initiate the workflow by entering
the Position (plan version, position number, and start date), with the old
Start Transaction, that instance of PDOTYPE_S (position) would then be
validated on the screen and bound into the workflow container. With the
Start Form, I need to use a structure. If I use OBJEC as my structure, the
individual data elements will automatically bind into the workflow
container, however the associated object is not instantiated. I then have
to add another step to "findwithoutdialog" to instantiate the object. Is
there a way to bind a BOT from the start form into the workflow container
directly without the additional step?
Many Thanks,
Sherie
Sherie Munday
SCC - Workflow Developer
610-481-4354
Mundays at airproducts.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20060110/3353da3d/attac
hment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
End of SAP-WUG Digest, Vol 14, Issue 18
***************************************
More information about the SAP-WUG
mailing list