Pur req-release wrkflw

John A Haworth jhoworth at csc.com
Wed Apr 23 06:31:49 EDT 2008


Thanks again for your fast response & info.

Should I be using 00000038 or 20000077?

John

CSC Computer Sciences Limited
Registered Office: Royal Pavilion, Wellesley Road, Aldershot, Hampshire, 
GU11 1PZ, UK
Registered in England No: 0963578

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in 
delivery. 
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to 
any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement 
or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such 
purpose.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




"Florin Wach" <florin.wach at gmx.net> 
Sent by: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu
23/04/2008 10:43
Please respond to
"SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>


To
"SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
cc

Subject
Re: Pur req-release wrkflw






Jup,

this seems to be not working a 100% as designed.

I usually deselect the SignificantlyChanged event as the terminating event 
in the workflow pattern (as a copy from the SAP's original), as that event 
is always accompanied by the .Rejection_start.

Also the (newer?) template WS20000077 has the same thing.

If you'd like to avoid that, you could also use a check-function module in 
the instance coupling of the task TS20000159 that avoids the event 
.SignificantlyChanged of beeing processed. Or you'd add a info-rejection 
as the first step in the rejection flow.

Best wishes,
Florin


-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:22:54 +0100
> Von: John A Haworth <jhoworth at csc.com>
> An: "SAP Workflow Users\' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> Betreff: Pur req-release wrkflw

> Thanks for that info.
> 
> Continuing on the same workflow. I have an issue with the way this seems 

> to be working, could someone please comment?
> 
> It seems that when the Pur Req is created and saved, WS0000038 is 
> triggered ok, and the approve request is sent to the correct Responsible 

> Agent. If that agent then Approves the PReq, the workflow works 
correctly 
> and the initiator is informed via a wflw task from WS0000038. But if the 

> agents rejects the Preq, then event 'SIGNIFICANTLYCHANGED' is raised 
which
> cancels down the initial workflow (WS0000038), together with a second 
> event  REJECTION_START   which then triggers a new single step workflow 
> (WS65400027)
> 
> This doesnt look correct, as cancelling down the initial workflow, means 

> that the task 'Negative Confirmation' in WS0000038 doesnt get touched 
and 
> therefore isnt sent to the initiator (whereas the positive confirmation 
> task is run when the Agent approves)
> 
> WS65400027 then waits for the event REJECTION_STOP as a terminating 
event,
> but the initiator is never informed.
> 
> Many Thanks
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> CSC Computer Sciences Limited
> Registered Office: Royal Pavilion, Wellesley Road, Aldershot, Hampshire, 

> GU11 1PZ, UK
> Registered in England No: 0963578
> 
> 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please 

> delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in 
> delivery. 
> NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC 
to 
> any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written 
agreement 
> or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such 

> purpose.
> 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Florin Wach (gmx)" <florin.wach at gmx.net> 
> Sent by: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu
> 21/04/2008 17:39
> Please respond to
> "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> 
> 
> To
> "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <sap-wug at mit.edu>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> Re: user exit on Pur req-release wrkflw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> if the box "Assigned agent" is left blank, der Task's standard role 
> resolution is used, which is, what's exactly happening there.
> 
> Look at the Task definition of TS... under "Rules".
> 
> Best wishes,
> Florin
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: John A Haworth 
> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group 
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 4:49 PM
> Subject: user exit on Pur req-release wrkflw
> 
> 
> Hi 
> 
> I am looking at a clients already created workflows. One is the purchase 

> requisition release standard workflow WS00000038. They have the purchase 

> reqs configured to use the LXM06U12 Customer enhancement to look in a 
> customer table for the approver name, that all looks ok. 
> But the first step in the workflow that sends the approval request to 
the 
> approver, has no entry in the 'Responsible Agents' entry box. Yet the 
> workflow seems to be sending to the right person?? Surely this is not 
> right, and my mental block thats happening more frequently is not 
helping!
> Any advice? 
> 
> John
> 
> CSC Computer Sciences Limited
> Registered Office: Royal Pavilion, Wellesley Road, Aldershot, Hampshire, 

> GU11 1PZ, UK
> Registered in England No: 0963578
> 
> 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please 

> delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in 
> delivery. 
> NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC 
to 
> any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written 
agreement 
> or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such 

> purpose.
> 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20080423/d8e0cc1c/attachment.htm


More information about the SAP-WUG mailing list