I came across the AssigneeGroupAccess group the other day...didn't know why it added it...but yes you are correct...the upgrade stomps (just like all previous upgrades) on the user form...had to add a few things back in to the form for my app to work again...interesting stuff really
-----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carey Matthew Black Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 9:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: v7.1 and the User/Group/Role forms w/ new stuff ( Standard WebServices, strange workflow...) All, I have started to look at a clean install (no existing db) of v7.1 in some detail and I have found a few interesting things..... Has anyone noticed the OOB Web Services that are in the base Server? I see three Public (Group access) web services: User Roles Group The form permission for the forms are as such: User: Public(hidden) Group: Administrator (only) Roles: Administrator (only) So the User Web Service and the form it points at (User) are Publicly accessible. However.... User's field 1 only has one group with access to it. Drum role.... "AssigneeGroupAccess". (No I did not stutter.) Which turns out to be 'Group ID' = 60988. ( Field 2 and 4 no longer have access to the records unless their 'Login Names' are added to the 'Dynamic Group Access' (field ID 60988) field. Ok.. so the data should be safe by default. However this construct raises a few questions for me too... I wonder if the installer does the "super smart thing" and reviews the permissions on field 1 on the User form before the changes and adjust the permissions on the field 1 and/or the data in 'Dynamic Group Access' after the changes? Or maybe it will just stomp on the User form (like it has in previous upgrades and trash the customizations that customers have made to the permissions? (and then leave the existing data totally unaccessible to anyone except admin?) Has anyone attempted to upgrade an existing server to v7.1 and have had customizations to the permissions on the form/fields? (Any one know if the customizations were stepped on or maintained?) OH.. and the 'Status' field actually has two values now. ("Current"(0), and "Disabled"(1)) And there is an OOB filter (User:SetUserStatusCurrent) that test for "( 'Status' = 20) AND ...". So I doubt that filter will ever be true. :( Maybe some of the OOB apps add more 'Status' values to the User form?) Just wondering.... -- Carey Matthew Black Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP) ARS = Action Request System(Remedy) Love, then teach Solution = People + Process + Tools Fast, Accurate, Cheap.... Pick two. ____________________________________________________________________________ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
