On the Status field on the User form, are the enum values set to 10 and 20? If not, it sounds like whoever wrote the new filter expected the Status field to use custom ID enumeration but the form never got modified for it.
I hope the upgrade doesn't change the enum values on that form unless it also changes all workflow references as well. I've yet to see an upgrade that was diligent about cleaning up custom workflow related to core forms. Chad Hall (501) 342-2650 -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carey Matthew Black Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 10:50 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" ************************************************************************* The information contained in this communication is confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and delete the original message or any copy of it from your computer system. Thank you. ************************************************************************* _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
