Looking for utility code

[former_member194669]

I am looking for code for the following scenario.

Our clients have multi regional developments centres located in Europe, South korea and mexico.

Here is my issue, for example program A is changed for work request number 1 by a developer in south korea, in the morning and get transported to Quality server, on the same day in mexico same program has been changed for work request number 2 by a different developer in the same day and transport to quality server.

Problem is the person who changed the code in korea, on the next day needs further correction and any transport to production is creating problems due to person who changed the code in mexico needs further testing

So i am looking a code that send email to developers in south korea and mexico that the same code is edited by multiple developers in the same day

Is anybody having a ready made code or something similar please paste it here.

PS I hope this is NOT against the forum rules.

a®

[Former Member]

Hi

It can use the user-exit EXIT_SAPLS38E_001 in order to intercept an user as soon as he tries to go into the editor for a certain program.

In the exit it could check the versions of program (fm SVRS_GET_VERSION_DIRECTORY) and so to know if it was changed several times from different developers.

Max

[Clemenss]

Hi a®s,

this is a general inconsistency, SAP herself does not provide any solution.

We are in a similar situation here. Some time ago, the company introduced transport management via SAP Solution manager system. So we have a huge administrative overhead but no solution at all.

In our centralized helpdesk ticket system, user A has an error ticket for problem 01. This is assigned to developer X. He will create a solution manager process with transport request transported to quality. User B reports error ticket for problem 02. This is assigned to developer Y later. If both users maintain the same program object, nobody knows who actually will test what in quality system and after the test, which solution will be released for production in what sequence.

I think the idea with the exit is quite good. We should check here if the version actually maintained is the productive version, and, if not, the previuous version is changed by the same developer. If one of those conditions is not true, manual interception is required.

Regards,

Clemens

[Former Member]

Hi

Clemens is right, my idea is just to try to give a warning if the development for a report is in progress: I think any mail should be sent to developer, but just to avoid a new development until the progress one is end.

In this case it can check if the last version is transported to production system, if it isn't the action should be locked, in this way the developer who needs to do the new modification can take care in order to know why and who is maintaning the program and decide what he has to do.

Max

[Clemenss]

Hi all,

encouraged by this thread, I started to think further: We will have to create a lot of administrative overhead for this to make sure the warning comes just once for one object.

Now my idea is the following:

The check should take place when a tranport entry is written for the object. For this I already identified function TRINT_CORR_INSERT getting triggered. But we have no exit or BadI here. Also, SAP does not allow to create an enhancement at an implicit enhancement spot here. It would be just fine because TRINT_CORR_INSERT exports a TADIR structure where we ave object name and request number.

I also tried BadI exit WB_PROCESS_FCODE which is called in the ABAP editor. It is reserved for SAP#s own purposes and can not be implemented.

So, if I stay with old-fashioned EXIT_SAPLS38E_00, I still don't know how to make sure that the warning action takes place only once: I would send an email notifying a distribution list. In this distribution list we could maintain the recipients in charge. They should get a notification just once per relevant transport request: A request gets relevant, if an object is maintained with another version than the current productive version. That means there may be at leat one more version of this object in quality system. Additionally I'd make sure, that the last version was not created by the same user, because frequently it is necessary to use more than request for the same task until it is tested successfully.

I don't know where to move or continue this thread but I'm grateful for any input that brings us closer to a robust solution.

Kind regards,

Clemens

[former_member194669]

Thanks all for your comments.

Possible options are:

1. Issue a warning message in the exit, will not be a preferred solution, "here rules are made to brake" so i preferred to send a mail to group, who can be transporting authority.

2. Use badi IF_EX_CTS_REQUEST_CHECK~CHECK_BEFORE_ADD_OBJECTS and give a detailed info about duplicates

3. Use badi IF_EX_CTS_REQUEST_CHECK~CHECK_BEFORE_RELEASE and give a POPUP_TO_CONFIRM with Yes or No.

Any other suggestions ?

a®

[Clemenss]

Hi a®s,

IF_EX_CTS_REQUEST_CHECK~CHECK_BEFORE_ADD_OBJECTS should be the one. But I have not yet found a simple and transparent solution to determine if the version modified is the current productive version: Conflicts are given only if the object has been changed but is transported only to quality system not yet to production server.

Probably we have to read transport protocols in this case. I have no idea on what functions or methods can be used for this.

Regards,

Clemens

[former_member194669]

 1. Issue a warning message in the exit, will not be a preferred solution, "here rules are made to brake" so i preferred to send a mail to group, who can be transporting authority. 

I am closing this thread. Currently i am going with above solution , to send mails to responsible group. to check the transport.

Thanks All for your valuable comments

a®

[Former Member]

> PS I hope this is NOT against the forum rules.

It's not so long as the responder actually owns the code (i.e. - not under copyright by their company or other entity).

Rob