I need to create an on demand workflow that will auto populate custom entities in CRM that are not related to each other..
Opportunity/ Opportunity Services fields need to populate CurrentContract/CurrentContract Services entities.
The fields are related as Opportunity Services > Opportunities > Account < CurrentContract < CurrentContract Services.
All fields from Opportunities need to create a CurrentContract and CurrentContract Services with identical information.
I agree with the other comments that a Custom Workflow Activity would be needed.
Another option would be to perform the action using JScript. There are pros/cons when moving the logic client-side, but some of the CRM REST libraries make it pretty easy to perform CRUD operations. Since you said "on demand workflow", you may want to consider client-side for user experience reasons.
Related
We'd like to allow our users to make changes to our ERP (only very limited conditions) from within the smartsheet. Is there a way to add a web service call based on changes to a cell?
It's certainly possible to do what you've described (provided, of course, that your ERP supports inbound web service calls to update data there).
If you're wanting to do this programmatically (i.e., by writing a script in Python or any other supported language), you can use the Smartsheet API to create one or more webhooks that will monitor Smartsheet for the type of changes you specify, and send your integration notifications when those events occur. Your integration would then listen for those inbound event notifications, and when they are received, it would programmatically issue the appropriate web service call(s) to update data in the ERP.
It's also worth mentioning that, depending on what ERP you're using, it may be possible for you to accomplish your goal without having to write any code. If you're interested in exploring the feasibility of that approach, I'd suggest you check out products like Zapier, Power Automate, etc. to see if they offer a connector for Smartsheet and your ERP. You may also want to check out the Smartsheet Connectors and Integrations page to see if there's a connector for your ERP listed there.
I'm developing a REST API using Zend Framework 1.12.3.
I have to implement subscriptions for different types of plans (i.e. Basic and Premium), each plan having different privileges (e.g. Premium may offer instant, daily and weekly SMS notifications, while Basic may offer only weekly SMS notifications).
Also, there may be custom plans only for certain clients.
I've added a column in the users table called subscription, but what I cannot figure out is where to save the privileges for each subscription plan.
Should I save these privileges directly into the DB (i.e. create a table called subscriptions, and another one called subscriptions_privileges having as columns subscription_id, privilege_name and privilege_value), or would it be better if I save them into the config file?
Thanks
Note: Actually this question is not linked with Zend Framework, it is system architecture question.
Short answer:
it is much more easy to hardcode your subscription plans in your source code configuration files;
it is much more flexible to store this data in database (you can create some administration panel to allow managers to manage them, track history of plan changes, use these data in analytical SQL queries). Theoretically you can deal with all this stuff through reading and writing to your config files, but databases are just the exact tool for these tasks.
P.S.: You can add separate layer of abstartion in your application. Use model objects for your subscriptions which can be populated either from database or from your hard-coded config files using different adapters.
I often need to create similar, but very long HTML forms for a client. The forms contain some inter-dependent fields and lot of validations. Some images also need to be uploaded.
Then the client needs to check the database in the CPanel and export it from there.
I want to create something with easy interface which can create complicated forms. Also, client is asking for easy-to-operate back end. The CMS option looks like an overkill. I want to keep the site as lightweight as possible because of performance requirement.
Please suggest me the best path I should take. Should I try to develop everything from scratch? Should I use a CMS? Is there any particular CMS more suitable for the task?
We use ChronoForms along with Joomla 3.1 to create such forms. It has two modes, an easier one that limits the functionality but creation of forms is much easier. The other one offers the full capabilities of the engine but requires manual steps to do even simple things.
Having said that, ChronoForms is the most powerful web based forms designer I have come across. It seems they also support Wordpress now.
They have a drag-drop mechanism to design the forms. Validations are easy to do via check boxes for the standard ones. You can save the results into database tables, send emails, redirect users to specific pages, add captchas.
The backend allows you to view the records and create new tables based on the fields of the form. You can also export the result as CSV.
I'm trying to create Siebel workflow for a new business requirement, I've checked Siebel Bookshelf and I'm bit confused with the flow. Especially I'm having difficulty in understanding the relationship between Workflow policy object, Workflow policy column, workflow policy component, workflow policy component col and how database triggers are created.
Can someone help me to understand these concepts better?
Workflow policy objects and components are very much like the business logic layer objects and components that support the Siebel GUI. A Workflow policy object might be Account, and its components could be Account, Account Contact, Account Address, etc.
Workflow policies themselves are still (I think) created in the Siebel GUI on the server. If your policy conditions are based on a custom field, you might have to add this to the workflow policy component involved using Siebel Tools.
The columns are the set of fields that the triggers are generated for and that Siebel workflow policy will be referenced against. The Siebel monitor components wake up when the trigger is fired, check the policy conditions, and then run whatever processes are attached to the policy.
Once the policy is defined, the generate triggers command needs to be called against the database to include the new trigger details your policy has created. This can be done using Siebel server manager or using SQL directly against the database. Check the Siebel Business Process Framework: Workflow Guide for more details on these steps and how to validate you work.
I want to track my custom activities' property values in my own tracking service, .i.e. I don't need it in the built in SQL tracking service. I have been successful in reproducing the SQL tracking service in that I can see the worklfow and activity states etc. but I want to see property values also.
We are writing many workflows for a document management system (DMS) using its own workflow engine that is based on MS WF. I can therefore not change the workflow runtime (if it was needed). The solution has to work with the embedded functionality of the underlying Microsoft workflow runtime.
Our workflows typically do database lookups through custom activities we write. These lookup values are then passed on to other activities for program flow or for persistence into the DMS. It would be great if we can see what these lookup values are at runtime and in fact the values of the DMS own activities' properties.
From my (admittedly limited) knowledge of MS's Workflow, the correct approach is to publish updates to your tracking service from within the workflow -- ie, if your workflow does some step, it should go to the tracking service and say "I did X". Your tracking service can record this information to answer any subsequent queries about what the workflow did (and what the various property values were at the time).
The essential point is that the WF engine is useful for running workflows - but is not very good at reporting on the progress of those workflows.
If you do have some control over the WF engine (you say its "based on MS WF") then one option may be to make your WF Engine publish such updates for all workflows. That may allow you to forgo explicit updates within your actual workflow definitions. However, if you really can't make any changes to the engine, then this won't work.