I have a transaction in CRM and it is reaching its maximum depth (8), it is a very complex chain of plug-ins and the business requires this operation in this way.
Is it a good option to change the maximum depth from (8) to (16) because our business requires or there is something that we should not do because there is a lot of logic being reached.
I asking this because Microsoft says this restriction is to detect infinite loops.
I want to ask Microsoft this, but this person that Microsoft has for us has a conflict of interest, because they want the same client we have, so if we suggest this for our CRM they will want to see what is wrong instead on focusing for the best solution for us.
Thanks in advance, I really appreciate your time.
We decide to group the plug-ins by entity and message.
So if we had one plug-in foo filtering new_field1 and another plug-in doing bar filtering new_field2 we merged both plug-ins in one.
One step was registered filtering both fields and the implementation handles when to call foo, bar or both.
This way we reduce the depth.
Related
The Reliable Services Overview topic has a section, at the bottom, called When to use Reliable Services APIs. In there, one list item says:
Your application needs to maintain change history for its units of state*.
The star at the end is explained just a little bit further down:
* Features available at SDK general availability.
The SDK has reached general availability by now, but I cannot find any information about how to make use of the "Maintain change history for its units of state"-feature or even a suggestion of what that actually means.
I'm asking here, in hope that someone can shed any light on this. I'm interested in knowing whether this feature is indeed available, or if not when it is supposed to be available, or if it has been abandoned.
Some insights on the intended design and functionality of this feature would also be much appreciated.
It describes the scenarios in which you might use the reliable collections. It can be used to keep multiple versions of an object and build a history of changes. (like delta's or snapshots)
This way you can create an event source. (it would require some coding on your end though)
Unit of state: entry in the State manager
I am an Epicor and Crystal Reports Newbie. I have started working with these programs a month ago, when I was hired. I am still trying to figure out how you know whether you are trying to customize a BAQ, Dashboard, etc. How to know where/when to make a new BOM report and such. If anyone out there has some tips, I would greatly appreciate it. I feel slightly intimidated by the program but am also determined to learn my way through it.
Thanks!
Toohey! Welcome to the world of Epicor!
Although I'm sure in the past couple of months you have learned the ropes, here are some extra tips to keep you moving forward:
That is not part of the system functionality
In order to keep costs under control, err on the side of not making system customizations to meet all user requests. You will quickly see that adding a quick field as a customization to a form isn't just the 5 minute change it seems like. You will soon be creating several custom reports and dashboards to report off of this field, and the cost of the change soon outweighs the benefit in many situations. As you become more familiar with this, try to balance ROI against the high cost of Epicor system customizations. It is best to lead with "that is not part of the system functionality", and when they push the issue, treat even small changes as controlled projects.
BAQ and Report Changes
Inevitably, you will need to customize the system's BAQs and Reports to meet your business needs because the standard system isn't designed exactly for your business.
Epicor has standard BAQs that start with 'z' and many reports. You should avoid editing the stock BAQs and reports, because they will be overwritten with each patch of Epicor. Instead, copy the standard distribution BAQs and rename the copies using your company initials as a prefix. Similarly, you want to create a custom reports folder separate (or within) the standard reports folder where you place all of your modified reports. You can then link the menu to the BAQ Report or Report Data Definition, and link the report style to the location of your new custom report on the server.
Customizations
Maintenance of customizations has a high long-term cost if you do not have in-house developers. A critical piece of advice here is to make sure all of the code, be it in C# or VB, is thoroughly commented. Even if you're generating code with a wizard, do yourself a favor and put a standard header into the script of every customization that includes the first date of the customization, when it was modified, and detail everything that was changed (especially if the change was a property change or a field addition that does not clearly appear in the script). Customizations have been known to fail for unexplained reasons, or create bad script that is not editable through the standard Epicor interface, and there may come a time when you have to rebuild the customization from scratch using only this change log and things you can clearly see in the form. You should save your customizations with some obvious standard naming convention (something like ORDER_ENTRY_CSR_YYMMDD), and make sure you update all menus to reflect the newest customization for the purpose you're using it. We also export our customizations for archival, just in case something should happen. Another note here is if you do not increment the customization name on a change and then update the menu items, users will still be use locally cached versions of the page until they clear their client cache. So, I always recommend incrementing. Another note on customizations and every custom exportable object in Epicor is to do yourself a favor and export them to either a source control system or a file repository so that after you deploy a faulty customization, rolling back to the previous version is quick and painless.
BPM Directives
As you're probably aware by now, BPM directives are powerful tools which can be used to update tables and prevent users from making terrible business decisions. A note on these is similar to customizations - comment comment comment!
Consultant Use
If you are using external consultants to create BPMs or Customizations, mandate distribution of commented source code that can be understood internally by one of your team members.
I hope this helps!
Source: 4 yrs experience as an Epicor ERP programmer
I would like to add that you should develop any Customization, BPM or Baq/Dashboard in the test system because any error on a solution can stop users from perform their job. Also, you can use a powerful tool called tracing options that helps you to recognize where to place the BPM directives. Further more there is a huge Epicor forum where you can post questions and a comunity of consultants , developers and users will answer your questions, and advise you about best Epicor practices, and it is completely free. You need to register on it; this is the link www.e10help.com.
I'm admittedly unsure whether this post falls within the scope of acceptable SO questions. If not, please advise whether I might be able to adjust it to fit or if perhaps there might be a more appropriate site for it.
I'm a WinForms guy, but I've got a new project where I'm going to be making web service calls for a Point of Sale system. I've read about how CRUD operations are handled in RESTful environments where GET/PUT/POST/etc represent their respective CRUD counterpart. However I've just started working on a project where I need to submit my requirements to a developer who'll be developing a web api for me to use but he tells me that this isn't how the big boys do it.
Instead of making web requests to create a transaction followed by requests to add items to the transaction in the object based approach I'm accustomed to, I will instead use a service based approach to just make a 'prepare' checkout call in order to see the subtotal, tax, total, etc. for the transaction with the items I currently have on it. Then when I'm ready to actually process the transaction I'll make a call to 'complete' checkout.
I quoted a couple words above because I'm curious whether these are common terms that everyone uses or just ones that he happened to choose to explain the process to me. And my question is, where might I go to get up to speed on the way the 'big boys' like Google and Amazon design their APIs? I'm not the one implementing the API, but there seems to be a little bit of an impedance mismatch in regard to how I'm trying to communicate what I need and the way the developer is expecting to hear my requirements.
Not sure wrt the specifics of your application though your general understanding seems ik. There are always corner cases that test the born though.
I would heed that you listen to your dev team on how things should be imolemented and just provide the "what's" (requirements). They should be trusted to know best practice and your company's own interpretation and standards (right or wrong). If they don't give you your requirement (ease-of-use or can't be easily reusable with expanded requirements) then you can review why with an architect or dev mgr.
However, if you are interested and want to debate and perhaps understand, check out Atlassian's best practice here: https://developer.atlassian.com/plugins/servlet/mobile#content/view/4915226.
FYI: Atlassian make really leading dev tools in use in v.large companies. Note also that this best-practices is as a part of refactoring meaning they've been through the mill and know what worked and what hasn't).
FYI2 (edit): Reading between the lines of your question, I think your dev is basically instructing you specifically on how transactions are managed within ReST. That is, you don't typically begin, add, end. Instead, everything that is transactional is rolled within a transaction wrapper and POSTed to the server as a single transaction.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
We are currently utilising an agile environment in work. One of my tasks involve setting up a release timetable. A part of this is providing a time frame of how long a project would take to go from a development environment, to staging and then live.
I have conflicting thoughts regarding whether such a timetable needs to be done.
For a start, we are quickly moving into a Continuous Integration / Constant Delivery environment where an application is tested amongst all environments when a change is made to the code base. Therefore, there is no time frame, but things should be "just" deployable. (Well, we always need a little bit of contingency as the best laid plans can always go awry)
Can anyone steer my in the right direction on what would be the best way to handle such time tables and timeframes if needed in Release Management in an Agile Product Development Environment.
Regards,
Steve
Can anyone steer my in the right direction on what would be the best way to handle such time tables and timeframes if needed in Release Management in an Agile Product Development Environment.
First of all the Scrum Framework guidelines never guides you to not have a Release Plan or Time table ever. What is leading you to have conflicting thoughts? I would like to know the source which is leading you to this conflict.
Best way to create a Release Plan is like this (this may take a week or so depending on the size of your project):
Get the Stakeholders in a room and get a EPIC user story written on the board using their guidance. The EPIC user story should include the end product vision. (ignore if already done)
List out the type of users.(ignore if already done)
Break the Epic user story into smaller and smaller chunks of user stories till they are small enough to be doable in sprints.(ignore if already done)
Ask the Product Owner(s) of the Scrum Team(s) to prioritize the stories in the uncommitted backlog list(s) Also do some form of effort estimation fairly quickly and do not waste a lot of time estimating.
Get the target end date or Go Live date of the project from Stakeholders.
Divide the time frame from now until the end date into Releases. Ask the stakeholders which features need to be delivered by when and include the appropriate user stories in them, and call them Releases. You can also give those Releases themes if needed.
The Release Plan now is conceptualized.
After this draw it on a white board or put it in a visible and transparent location where everyone can see it - add user story cards to the appropriate release.
Now your initial release plan should be ready
Ideas for implementation:
Form a Scrum Team specifically for Operations Activities. They could follow Scrum or Kanban would be better.
As and when Development teams get "shippable products" put in the shelf, the Operations Kanaban Team can do the deployment and release branching etc tasks as per the Release Plan.
So this way the development Teams don't really focus on the Release plan or work, just the Operations Team does that. The Development Team just focussed on the Sprint Work, it would be the Product Owners headache to make sure the right user stories are in the right Release and in the right order. The direction would be given by the Stakeholders.
To be honest you really don't have to do anything yourself, it's all in the stakeholders and POs hand, I don't know where is is the fuss??
I hope you get the picture.
I usually maintain a release plan for the management that is mainly based on a combination of the estimated & prioritized user stories (I group them to match a main new feature of the product) and velocity.
With a well maintained product backlog it's pretty easy to do your release plan. I usually plan three to four releases a year.
What I like with Scrum is that I can potentially release after each iterations.
If you want to master your release management, you will need more information that few answers of practionners. I highly suggest you this book.
If you currently utilising and agile environment you should check Agile estimating and Planning book for some suggestions. This book also contains small chapter about Release planning.
Some release planning should be always done. Release is a target wich usually covers 3-12 months of development = set of iterations. It something which describes target criteria for project to success. It is usually described as combination of expected features and some date. Features in this case are usually not directly user stories but epics or whole themes because you don't know all user stories several months ahead. Personally, I think release is something that says when the project based on vision can be delivered. It takes high level expectations and constraints from the vision and converts them to some estimation. You can also divide project to several releases.
But remember that three forces works in agile as well. There is direct relation among Feature set, Release date and Resources (+ sometimes also mentioned fourth force: Quality). Pushing one of these forces always move others. It is usually modelled as equilateral triangle (or square).
There are different approaches to plan a release. One is mentioned in the book. It is based on user stories estimation, iteration length selection and velocity estimation but I'm little bit sceptic to this approach because you don't have simple user stories for whole release and estimating epics and themes is inaccurate. On the other hand high level feature definition is exactly what you need for three forces. If you don't have enough time you will implement only basic features from all themes. If you have more time you will implement more advanced features. This is task for product owner to correctly set business priority when dividing epics and themes into small user stories.
The most important part in agile is that you will know more quite soon. After each iteration you will have better knowledge of your velocity and you will also reestimate some planned user stories. For this reason I think the real estimate (accurate) and realease date should be planned after few iterations. As I was told on one training effort should not be estimated, effort should be measured. If anybody complains about it show him Waterfall and ask him when will he get relatively accurate estimate? Hint: Hardly before end of analysis wich should be say after 30% of the project.
It is also important what type of projects do you want to implement using agile / scrum and how long will project be. Some projects are strictly budget or date driven others can be more feature driven. This can affect your release planning. For short projects you usually have small user stories and you can provide much more accurate estimate at the beginning.
This is a very loaded question, and depends on your company to be sure. I first have to ask, why are you using 3 environments and continuous integration (your reason matters)? Are you performing automated tests at all? How are your code branches setup? Do you release for some functionality, or just routine maintenance fixes?
Answering these will give you an idea of why you need a release, and how you should go about it.
For example, if you only have a staging environment for the purpose of integration and perform automated tests, then can't having a separate code branch in which continuous integration tests run be sufficient?
If staging is to perform some sort of user acceptance, does your company have a dedicated testing team or are they members of the agile teams?
As you correctly stated, if the code is always integrated and tested, then why would you need a timetable and moving from environment to environment unless you were unsure about the actual "done" condition of the features? By that, I mean that it's not that you're unsure that the feature was coded correctly, but are you worried it will introduce other bugs? Will it integrate well with code already in production? Address the concerns at the root of the problem. Don't just do it because you think you're supposed to have X environments or testing should be in another group. Maybe the solutions to those problems may be to adjust the definition of "done" accordingly.
As you can see there are many, many factors that will make your organization unique. There is no one right way to answer this, just tradeoffs that you are willing to accept.
I find that having multiple environments with teams of people working at the various layers tends to be anti-agile and counterproductive. The best bet is to analyze your concerns, and try to find ways to solve them (such as expanding the definition of "done", or breaking up the various organizations and putting them on the teams, eliminating as many environments as possible and simplifying the process, etc). That may not be possible in your organization, so you may have to live with tradeoffs.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm working in a small company and weeks away from deploying a web-app that will be used a lot. Everyone at one location will have to learn to use it, and although I think it's pretty easy and intuitive I may be biased.
I've written a help guide with plenty of screenshots that's available on every page, but I'll still need to train everyone. What's the best way? How do you take a step back and explain code you've been working on for weeks?
First try to avoid the training:
Perform usability testing to ensure your web app is intuitive. Usability testing is a very important aspect of testing and it is often ignored. How you see your system will probably be very different as how a new user sees your system.
Also add contextual help as often as you can. For example when I hover over a tag in stack overflow, I know exactly what clicking it will do, because it tells me.
Also this may seem obvious, but make sure you link to your documentation from the site itself. People may not think of looking in your documentation unless its right in front of their eyes.
About training documentation:
Try to split up your material into how your users would use the system. I personally like the "trails" option that Sun created for their Java tutorials. In this tutorial you can do several things, and you can chose on which trail you'd like to go.
Support random reads in your help documentation. If they have a task to do in your web app, then they should be able to get help on that without reading a bunch of unrelated content.
Make sure your documentation is searchable.
About actual training sessions:
If you are actually performing training sessions, stay away from explaining anything related to your code at all. You don't need to know about the engine to drive a car.
Try to split up your training sessions into very focused aspects of your system. If you only have 1 training session available to you then just do one specialized use case of your system + the overall description of the system. Refer to the different parts of documentation where they can get help.
Letting the community help itself:
No matter how extensive your documentation is, you'll always have cases that you didn't cover. That's why it's a good idea to have a forum available to all users of the system. Allow them to ask each other questions.
You can review this forum and add content to your documentation as needed.
You could also open up a wiki for the documentation itself, but this is probably not desirable if your user base isn't very large.
Few ideas:
Do you have some canned walk-through scenarios? Don't know if it is applicable for your product, but I built a pretty substantial product a couple years ago and developed some training modules that they'd work through - nothing long, maybe 15 minutes tops for each one.
I put together a slide presentation that hit the highlights to talk about what it does. I would spend about 10 minutes going through the app's highlights to familiarize them with it before doing the hands-on stuff.
People don't tend to read stuff, unfortunately. You could put hours and hours into a help document, and still find that folks simply don't read it or skim over it. That can be frustrating. Expect that answers that are in your guide will be the topic of questions your users will have.
Break up any training you do into manageable chunks. I've been to a full-day training exercise before and the trainer broke it into short pieces and made it easy for me to get the training topic in my head. You don't want to data-dump on them because their eyes will gloss over and you'll lose them.
Ultimately, if your app is highly usable, it should be a piece of cake. If it isn't, you'll find out. You might want to have a few folks you know run through your training ahead of time and give you constructive criticism on it. Better to fix it before the big group is trained. You'll be more confident in the product and the training materials (whatever they are) and you'll likely have a better training experience.
If applicable, provide an online help/wiki/faq for them. Sometimes that is helpful.
Best of luck!
You should really have addressed this issue a lot earlier in the development cycle than you are doing.
In my view the ideal scenario for corporate software is one where the users design their own application and write their own documentation and I always try to strive for this. You should have identified key users early on and designed the system with them (I try to get my users to do basic screen designs and menu layouts in Excel or similar - then I implement that as static pages and review before writing a line of significant code, obviously they won't get the design right first time, but it's your job to guide them - and ideally in a way where they think they came up with the correct design decisions, not you :-) ).
These users should then write the user documentation from this design in parallel with you developing the system. I have never seen help documentation delivered by a IT department/software company used significantly in a corporate setting. Instead what happens is the users will create their own folder of notes and work-arounds and refer to this (in fact if you're ever doing system analysis to replace an existing system finding the 'user-bible' for the old system is a key strategy). Getting the users to write their own documentation up-front simply harnesses what will happen anyway - but this is vastly easier if the users feel they have ownership of the system because they designed it themselves in the first place.
Of course this approach needs commitment and time from your users, but generally it's not that hard a sell. It's trite, but working as a facilitator so the users can develop there own system rather than as a third party to give them a system pretty much guarantees user acceptance.
As you are where you are you're too late to implement all of this, but if you can identify a couple of keen, key, users and get time from them to write their own documentation then that would be a good move. If you can't get even that then you need to identify an evangelist who you can train to be the 'departmental' expert and give them 110% of your energy to support them.
The bottom line is that user acceptance is based on perception, and this does not necessarily correlate with how usable an system actually is. You have to focus on the group psychology of this as much as the reality of the system, which tends to be tricky for developers as we're much more factually based than most people.
I'll be looking into something like this too in the next few months.
In your case, hopefully the UI has already undergone user acceptance testing. You say you work in a small company. Is it possible to get the least tech-savvy person there to try it out? In fact, get them to try it out without any guidance from yourself except for questions they ask. Document the questions and make sure your user-guide answers them.
The main thing for me would be logic and consistency. If the app's workflow relates logically to the task it has been designed to accomplish and the UI is consistent you should be OK.
Create a wiki page to describe the use of your system. Giving edit rights to the users of your system lets the users:
update the documentation to correct any errors in the initial release of documentation,
share any tips on usage they may have found.
share unusual uses for the system that you may not have thought of.
request features.
provide any workarounds they've found while waiting for the new functionality to be implemented.
Try a few users first, one or two in a small company. Mostly watch, help as little as possible. This tells you what needs to be fixed, and it creates an experienced user base - so you are not the "training bottleneck" anymore.
Turn core requirements/use cases/storycards into HowTo / walkthroughs for your documentation.
For a public training, prepare a 10..15 minute presentation (just that, not more!) that covers key concepts that the users absolutely must understand, than show your core walkthroughs. Reserve extra time for questions about how to solve various tasks.
Think as a user, not as a techie: - noone cares if it's a SQL database and you spent a lot of time to get the locking mechanisms right. They do care about "does it slow me down" and "does something bad happen when two people do that at the same time". Our job is to make complicated things look easy.
It may help to put the documentation on the intranet in an editable form - page "comments", or wiki maybe. And/or put up a "error wiki" for error messages and blips - where you or your users can quickly add recomendations, workarounds and reasons for anything that does not go as expected.
Rather then train all those people I have chosen a few superusers (at least one person from each department) and trained them to teach the rest of the employees. It is of course vital that those super users are
well respected in their departments
able to teach
like the application
The easy way to ensure that they like the app is to have them to define the way it should work :-). Since they should work with this app each and every day they are the prime stakeholders, no matter what management states