locked
Custom Version Status RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi,

     

    At the present time, A version could be in either of these three status modes :

     

    ·     Open 

    ·     Locked 

    ·     Committed 

    Is there a way to add some new status modes / modify these status modes (even a custom way) ? 

     

    if there is no way, Could it be added into the wishes list for the next MDS version, please ?

     

    Thank you,




    Note: Please vote/mark the post as answered if it answers your question/helps to solve your problem. _________________________________________________________ Regards,

    Xavier Averbouch,

    Avanade France

    Friday, January 14, 2011 4:51 PM

Answers

  • A few ideas:

    You probably know that you can change the version names--so that is a simple thing to help you track what you're doing.

    In the User and Group Permissions functional area, on the Hierarchy Members tab, you can set permissions based on version. Permissions effect the selected version and any future copies of that version. In this way you can do some security based on version.

    Another idea might be to use the Model Deployment wizard to copy a version of your data to a new model when needed. Then you could take full advantage of security.

    It's true that a SharePoint workflow is separate from MDS. You can create a simple workflow within MDS (by using a domain-based attribute that shows Pending, Approved, Declined), but you can't set security based on an attribute value.

    Hope this helps.

     

     


    Suzanne Selhorn [MSFT]
    Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:11 PM

All replies

  • Hi Xavier,

    What kind of changes are you thinking of? Is there something specific that you want to do but you can't? (Copying versions that aren't locked, or un-committing a version, or??)

    You can always add requests on https://connect.microsoft.com/sqlserver.

    Thanks.


    Suzanne Selhorn [MSFT]
    Friday, January 14, 2011 10:46 PM
  • Hi Suzanne,

    Marius Zaharia will answer your reply today. He has more information about our needs.

     

     


    Note: Please vote/mark the post as answered if it answers your question/helps to solve your problem. _________________________________________________________ Regards, Xavier Averbouch, Consultant, Avanade France
    Monday, January 17, 2011 9:38 AM
  • Hi,

    As Xavier said, we need to do some customization on our workflow.

    The need is related to have some intermediary statuses of the version, like: Work Open, Work Ended, Test Open, Test Ended. The statuses do not need a specific functionality related - we may assimilate them with the actual Open status. However, there may be a need of permissions configuration based on status (ie. editing limitation in Test Open status).

    I was thinking before to a customized external workflow (SharePoint based or not). The problem is that I don't see a manner of integration between the external workflow and the MTS native one (except launching it through a business rule).

    Do you have any suggestions or ideas?

    Thanks,
    Marius Z

     


    Marius
    Tuesday, January 18, 2011 9:48 PM
  • A few ideas:

    You probably know that you can change the version names--so that is a simple thing to help you track what you're doing.

    In the User and Group Permissions functional area, on the Hierarchy Members tab, you can set permissions based on version. Permissions effect the selected version and any future copies of that version. In this way you can do some security based on version.

    Another idea might be to use the Model Deployment wizard to copy a version of your data to a new model when needed. Then you could take full advantage of security.

    It's true that a SharePoint workflow is separate from MDS. You can create a simple workflow within MDS (by using a domain-based attribute that shows Pending, Approved, Declined), but you can't set security based on an attribute value.

    Hope this helps.

     

     


    Suzanne Selhorn [MSFT]
    Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:11 PM
  • Thanks Suzanne,

    I noted your answers.
    Even if the implicite answer to the initial question results to be negative, I take into consideration the options you suggested. Actually, we already imagined a DBA-based complementary workflow - which has some security filtering/permission based on it, by the way.

    Thanks again,


    Marius
    Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:33 PM