I've implemented a custom workflow in Adobe CQ5.6, similar to http://blogs.adobe.com/learningwem/2011/11/30/cq5-4-workflow-example-approve-reject-by-the-reviewer/
I'm using CQ5 inbox notifications only -- no email notifications.
The problem is, after the Approver selects either "Approve" or "Reject", the inbox notification does not get removed, even though the workflow continues / completes.
There doesn't seem to be an option to manually delete a notification, unless you go into crxde and delete the nodes. So the main concern here is that notifications will quickly pile up, making it confusing to figure out which ones are current, and ultimately clogging up the app.
This only seems to happen at this exact step in the workflow. The Author's notifications disappear once they've been dealt with, as you would expect.
Has anyone had anything like this happen before?
Something about the way I worded this question helped me figure out the answer.
The Author's notifications disappear ... as you would expect
This made me think it might be a user permission problem rather than anything to do with the workflow step.
I confirmed this by switching the roles of the two user types, (so the Approver starts the workflow and the Author must approve the change). As I guessed, it was any notification assigned to the Approver, rather than notifications generated by that particular workflow step, which were not disappearing.
Specifically, the permission that was missing was for /etc/workflow/instances. I allowed all methods for that user, and my problem is resolved.
You can edit permissions via /useradmin.html in your CQ5 instance (in my case, http://localhost:4502/useradmin.html )
Related
I'm having a problem with a Condition in a workflow:
The condition is:
Sending pages to Approval that match the condition are working as expected and moving to the Approve step:
However those that do not match the condition are getting stuck in the condition step and the email is not sent as expected:
I'm getting the following error on Event Log:
The connection is there and it's automatic, as you can see on the first image. Hence the question, anyone knows why this could be happening?
The "Send email to Jira" step is setup as follows (email redacted):
But I don't think it's even reaching it, as there's no other log entries for an email error, and the default emails from the workflow are indeed working as expected.
If user wants to move page from Condition workflow step, he must have a Manage workflow permissions.
However since your role (CMS Approvers) most probably do not have this permissions - workflow process stuck with the error message.
Although the error message is not very descriptive (we can definitely improve this part) this is the reason of your issue.
To solve it, please navigate to the Security section of the Condition workflow step and set Roles which can approve, reject and make changes
section to All except listed as you can see here: http://prntscr.com/pdtrgs
Also please double check that CMS Approvers role has Manage workflow permission.
Then it should work as expected.
I was able to recreate this issue in both Kentico 11.0.47 and Kentico 12.0.33. The strange thing about this is that an email does send if you reverse the steps. In other words, if the user is a global admin, then send an email. That works.
I'll need to ask the developers about this, and see if there is something we're both missing. Otherwise this looks like buggy behavior.
-Keith Hammond; Kentico Support
I have reviewed all the past questions as well as scoured google results, but I can't find a good answer to this.
In our MS Dynamics CRM 2016 Cloud implementation, we have added email notifications to the owner of a Lead, or Opportunity, based on certain events. Sometimes the owner is a Team, and in those cases, we want to avoid sending to the team (it causes the workflow to get stuck in "waiting for retry based on error").
I added a qualification to all the workflows to say: If OwningUser.PrimaryEmail Contains Data ...
My theory was that if a user were associated with the Owner field, this would pass (all of our users have primary emails except service accounts), and if a team were associated, it would fail. However, that is not happening - it is still trying to send the email and failing.
I was concerned that it could be an issue if no user were assigned and the system tried to reference a null value.
However, I can't see another way to do this and no one I've talked to seems to know either.
Try adding a condition like this. This should hopefully tell you if the owner is populated with a team record, if not then you are safe to send the email.
If you take a page and put it in a workflow, then if someone wants to modify that page – in an emergency situation and essentially start another workflow on it –
Is that possible to send that page through another workflow?
If you don’t want to send the same page through a workflow, but just want to edit it, can you?
Apparently If one person is editing a CQ page and same page is edited by someone else at the same time, at production level, how the CQ / developer handles the situation?
Thanks in Advance
It is not possible to subject a page to more than one workflow at once, none of the interfaces allow this to happen.
The pages can be edited even when they are subject to a workflow. In emergency situations where in it is not possible to complete the workflow , users with required privileges can terminate the workflow from the instances tab of the workflow console (/libs/cq/workflow/content/console.html). Pages can be usually activated even if they are subject to workflows.
The repository is accessed via repository session. Based on the credentials provided the user gets a repository session. Any changes made via that session is only visible to the other users when the session is saved. Since different sessions are used , multiple users can edit the same page simultaneously. The data in dialogs are loaded via asynchronous GET requests when EDIT is clicked and not on page load , so it is very unlikely that the user will be editing old data. They can still overwrite some other user's changes. Developers do not have to handle these situations unless there is some special requirement. If a user wants to stop other users from editing a page , they can use the lock functionality that comes out of the box. A locked page can be unlocked only by the user who locked it or an administrator. A page or node can be programmatically locked via the JCR API.
Github provides notifications via mail or web, based on watched repos. But is there a way to get more in detail? Like only watch a specific pull requet or assigned issue? I feel like i get spammed from comments on other pull requests that have nothing to do with me.
Update Nov. 2020: you now have "Custom notification controls"
This week we are giving you more control over the types of content that you are notified about on GitHub:
Watching a repository can often be a double-edged sword.
You want to stay up to date with a project, but if you have a specific interest or role within the community, you have no choice but to subscribe to updates on everything.
No more.
Beneath the watch button, you’ll find that we have made a few changes: we’ve made the language clearer so you know what you’ll receive updates about, we’ve made the interface more accessible and, we’ve introduced a new custom category.
Within this, you can select the types of content you would like to be notified about.
Do you focus on code review? Limit your notifications to pull requests.
Are you a community manager? Select Discussions.
As new types of notifications are added, you’ll find them in this menu.
You’ll find these controls on all repository pages and on your watching page where you can customize notifications for repositories you already watch.
Update May 2019: you now have "Custom thread subscriptions"
You can now limit the types of notifications you receive for any issue and pull request to be specific to merge, reopened and/or closed events.
That should allow to further control the amount of emails received.
Update July 2017: you now can declare in the GitHub repo a code owner.
Any pull request touching a file managed by said code owner will trigger a notification to that person.
See "Repo owner automatic notification after updating a pull request"
2015: Yes, for instance, for a specific issue on a project (issue 2595), you can register by clicking the "Subscribe" button at the right side of the page (since 2015).
Once clicked, it will appear as "Unsubscribe" (for you to click if you don't want any more notifications)
So you don't have to watch the all repo, you can subscribe only to specific issues.
Not sure if this has changed, but now there's a subscribe button in the top right corner:
https://help.github.com/articles/subscribing-to-conversations/
first disclaimer, Im part of the team at zigi.ai
Instead of getting notifications for every activity on Git via email or web, Zigi integrates with your Github to learn your pull request activity,
Filters the information and sends you actionable notifications on your pull requests activity (from all repos) that is relevant to your work directly from Slack.
Once a PR is created in GitHub, Zigi manages the entire workflow:
Gathers all the communications related to a PR- that's relevant to
you
Tells me which PRs are waiting for my review from all repos
Shows which of my PRs are waiting for a teammate's review and for how
long
Makes it easy to ping teammates to remind them (without feeling
awkward about bothering them)
Lets me add reviewers
Tells me when a PR is stuck or open for a long time
Helps me make sure the code owner approved
See here an example of a Slack message with filtered notification for pull request
I am using Microsoft CRM 4.0. I currently have many accounts that need to be updated by the sales person assigned to the account. What would be the best way to notify the user of the update? Also, It would be nice if there was also a way to notify me back that the task had been completed. I was thinking the best way would be through a workflow but It does not allow me to select multiple accounts at once to notify the user, of which ones need the update. I also have mobile access with CRM.
You're on the right track. You could use a combination of workflows to accomplish this. I don't know what exactly it is they need to update but you could create a bit flag called new_isrecordupdated and then create workflows that wait until the fields needing to be updated are changed. When they are you can set that flag to true. Then have another workflow sleep for X days and verify that the field is false, if so send out an email to the user.
If you need them to complete tasks, then the workflow will need to sit on the tasks if they're regarding an account. On a status change of completed, update the flag to false.
Again, I'm not sure what you're looking for them to update so I can't say with 100% certainty that this is what you need.
Depending on how many accounts you are talking about, you may want a scheduled console application to find all of the outstanding accounts that still require attention. It could then create a single email for each sales person each day with links to each of the accounts that still required attention.
You could also have a single daily report letting you know which accounts had been updated and which were still needed updating.
These could be done with a scheduled application or an SSRS Report.
In addition it would be helpful to add a view for your sales reps that showed them the complete list of accounts that they needed to update. You would also want a similar view sorted by the assigned owner.
This way you have notification, but not abusive notification if a lot of these are happening and you have a way for both you and your salesmen see anything outstanding with a simple glance at a view.
You would probably need to have a boolean to set an account as needing an update, and then you could use a plug-in to reset that flag whenever the owner updated it along with setting a last updated date. This would give you the fields to flag an account as needing to be updated and the date would allow you to see which accounts had been updated by their owners.