Unrelease the task number?

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi....

I Want to unrelease the task number. how?

Thanks,

Naveen.I

[Former Member]

Hi Naveen,

I dont think we can rollback the task which has already been released.

Regards,

Chandra Sekhar

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi Chandra...

Thanks for your attention.,

Iam sure.., we are having one transaction code to do it, untill request number not released.

Iam not able to call back it, as I am not worked with this previously.

Expecting that procedure from SDN.

Thanks you,

Naveen.I

[ThomasZloch]

You cannot. Changing one of the objects in that task will prompt for a new task being created under the same transport request, so it should not be a problem.

Thomas

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi.... Thomas...

You are right..,

But, this is the senorio, which is useful, where we unfortunately release the task with syntax errors.

Also my reuirement is the same.

Thanks for your attention,

Naveen Inuganti.

[ThomasZloch]

But what is the problem in correcting the syntax errors under a new task? No harm done until the actual request gets released.

Please let me know once you found a way to "unrelease", I'd be very interested.

Cheers

Thomas

[Former Member]

Hello Naveen.

I am in full agreement with both Thomas and you.

I just want to ask that whether the request has been imported to the target system or not.

But, If not There is a transaction STMS - Transport Management System which allows you to monitor and rectify your request tasks.

You can definately delete these requests,

Amazingly, there is an option which allows deleting of Imported requests too.

I would like suggest a few steps, If you have already done then that's good.

1. Go To Transaction STMS.

2. Click on Import Overview.

3. Double click the system you are working on.

4. Click on the request from the list or from the import history.

5. To delete only released requests, Go to Request -

---

> Delete Request.

6. To delete imported requests, Go to extras -

---

> Delete Imported requests.

Good Luck & Regards.

Harsh Dave

[Former Member]

Probably the only option is to make a table level change...

You need to modify the entry in E070 table manually and change the TRSTATUS field from 'R'(Released) to 'D'(modifiable)..

This will definately work...but being a table level change...should be the last option and used only if essential.

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hey Piyush....

Thank you...

Here the procedure to unrelease task number..

We have to change field TRSTATUS in E070 table...

That is R for released change it as D.

Done.

Thanks,

Naveen.I

[Former Member]

>

> Hey Piyush....
> 
> Thank you...
> 
> Here the procedure to unrelease task number..
> 
> We have to change field TRSTATUS in E070 table...
> That is R for released change it as D.
> 
> Done.
> 
> Thanks,
> Naveen.I

But its not needed at all since your request it not move to PRD.you can create one new request by just saveing again the object.

but if the your object is already moved to PRD and you proceed with this above method than you won't be able to track Transport request log in future.because this requset has been changed to Realeasd to Modifiable status by Changing the E070 table manually even thought your TR is still exsist on PRD.which is Very Bad practice and never Suggested by SAP.

The conclusion of your doing is like modifiable request may be still exsist on PRD cause you manually changed its status wich is very much unusal thing.

Amit.

[ThomasZloch]

Chiming in with Amit here.

By changing this flag on table level you can modify the task again, even deleting objects from it. However, when releasing the task before, all objects inside were already released to the parent request. Now when deleting an object from the task, it is still included in the request, and you might transport it later on without even knowing it is still in there. Very dangerous, so I don't let this count as a valid option for "unreleasing".

Thomas

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi... Amit...

That is very good to have your explination with this thread..

Yes.., It will make unneccessary complications with misuse..

And..,

Once again I will explain my problem to you.......

I created one reuest numebr and it contains one task.

And this task contains one report source code.

Here in this report source code we are having one select statement with out where condition...

So it can be trace out at ST05 or SHIFT+F2 for task number selection.

But the task number is already released in this case with out that check...

So how can I transport that task with error free.

Plz let me know If any other solution for this.

Thanks,

Naveen Inuganti.

[Former Member]

Thomas

Thats right .

Very much strange and dangerous thing to track back these changes in future.

Cheers.

[ThomasZloch]

why don't you try what I suggested above? Correct that error in your source code, save, system will open a new task, release that task as well. Done.

Keep in mind, you're not transporting tasks, you're transporting requests.

Thomas

[Former Member]

naveen,

there is no need to unreleased at all as we already said you can just save your changes again it will prompt you new TR and save and release again this is simplest and most preffable solution

don't much bother brother

Amit.

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi Amit and Thomas...

Thanks for your replies..,

Yes, I know that procedure, to create other task for the same request..!

But my intention to post this thread and to follow above procedure is only one... i.e.

I feel its not better to have syntax errors with my task number..., as it is very basic step to check before release task.

To meet this reuirement I done that.. Now my task is error free.

Kindly excuse me if any wrong direction in this thread for the same.

Thanks,

Naveen.I

[ThomasZloch]

Naveen, I really sense a misunderstanding here. Once you correct the syntax error, also the previously released task will be error-free. Both tasks, old and new, point to the same development object.

I hope this clears things up.

Thomas

[former_member226999]

Hi Naveen,

If you have resolved this then congrats. But thought of putting few tips and advices.

First thing never in SAP system do any SAP table level change, you are invalidating your Service licence agreement in doing so. If any inconsistencies arise in production because of such recklessness then SAP will simply blame you. You can do as many changes in a Z table created by you but never in SAP tables.

Regarding transports, if you have bug in a transport which has been released then donu2019t worry. Simply create a new transport and release into production in the order of release that is first the error transport goes in and then the correction transport goes in.

If you have not released the transport and only the task under the transport is released then just go to the object in question (your case program) and make necessary corrections and when you save it then it will simply create a new task under the same transport. Nothing to worry simply release the task and the transport and everything should be fine.

Hope this helps.

Franc

[ThomasZloch]

Good explanation, but what is the added information compared to Amit's and my efforts?

[Former Member]

>

> Good explanation, but what is the added information compared to Amit's and my efforts?

Thomas,

Really i was also trying to figure out whats new thing we have to learn from Franc

I think he just trying to pushed

up our views to Naveen's ears

Cheers

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi....

> I went for modify the table entry E070.

because of, I am not sure about following....

> Once you correct the syntax error, also the previously released task will be error-free

oooops...,

Thanks Thomas and Amit.

Can I close this thread now???

Thank you,

Naveen Inuagnti.

[Former Member]

>

> Can I close this thread now??? 
>   
> 
> Thank you,
> Naveen Inuagnti.

No,you should wait for some new explored thing from franc

I'm waiting and eager for new things,

but Not sure whether Thomas also waiting or not

Cheers

[ThomasZloch]

Let's give everybody a break and put this case to rest

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi....

> Franc wrote....

> SAP will simply blame you

Thank you Franc, I will keep this in mind...

Hi Amit...,

Thanks, for your attention, which pushed this thread in good direction...

Hi Thomas...

Ya.. Iam giving rest to this thread.,,,

Cheers...

Naveen.I

[Former Member]

>

> Let's give everybody a break and put this case to rest 

Actually, I'd like to know how/why an object with syntax errors was activated and the transport released.

Rob

[Former Member]

>

> Actually, I'd like to know how/why an object with syntax errors was activated and the transport released.
> 
> Rob

Why:I dont know we need to Ask naveen.

How:By pressing Activate anyway option

Cheers

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi Rob...

That is not syntax error,

>> CHECK SYNTAX option

As you know we can run this from task number directly...with SHIFT+F2

It will gives...following three checks....

Documentation check
 Package check for DDIC objects
 Code Inspector Checks

In the last one... i.e in Code Inspector Checks -> performance checks ...

Iam having error...

Hope you got it...!!!

Thanks,

Naveen.I

[Former Member]

>

> How:By pressing Activate anyway  option 
> 
> Cheers

Yeah - I phrased it badly.

I was really thinking why. You could potentially get into trouble with version management. You can have the same version in different instances with different code. I suspect SAP has good reasons for not providing an unrelease function.

Rob

[Former Member]

>

> How:By pressing Activate anyway  option 
> 
> Cheers

Yeah - I phrased it badly.

I was really thinking why. You could potentially get into trouble with version management. You can have the same version in different instances with different code. I suspect SAP has good reasons for not providing an unrelease function.

Rob

[Former Member]

>

> How:By pressing Activate anyway  option 
> 
> Cheers

Yeah - I phrased it badly.

I was really thinking why. You could potentially get into trouble with version management. You can have the same version in different instances with different code. I suspect SAP has good reasons for not providing an unrelease function.

Rob

[Former Member]

>

>You can have the same version in different instances with different code. I suspect SAP has good reasons for not providing an unrelease function.
> 
> Rob

Cheers

[former_member226999]

Hi Amit & Thomas,

You feel I have put your words because we all refer to the same book of knowledge SAP.

I thought you guys were putting words in more tricky way and Naveen was not getting the message correctly, so I simply explained to him in simple English.

By the way I am not a rookie been in this business for more than 8 years. There would be definetly something which I can teach you... may be a session on how not to be rude?

Be of good cheer,

Franc

[matt]

Seemed quite good natured to me.

[Former Member]

I recon naveen already got what we said so that's why he re-open his thread again

Franc,

anyways Don't mind and don't take our words in other way.we were just hoping something new from your post but you came exactly same what we already sugeest naveen a way back .

Don't mind Cheers

There would be definetly something which I can teach you

Is't smell some rUdE here

[former_member226999]

There it goes... Now you are making me to be a regular on this site.

I felt Naveen was not aware of consequences of changing a SAP table.... that is why he went in to change the table. I wanted to just remind him that he would screw up things if he learns the dirty tricks.

Cheers,

Franc

[Former Member]

>

>  There it goes... Now you are making me to be a regular on this site.

That's sounds good

I felt Naveen was not aware of consequences of changing a SAP table.... that is why he went in to change the table. I wanted to just remind him that he would screw up things if he learns the dirty tricks.

I personally believe now he understand the consequences of changing the SAP table without any strong reason

Cheers

Amit

[naveen_inuganti2]

Hi.... Friends...

Yes..! I will never go for that...!! You can strongly believe amit....!!!

Thanks for your helpful attention here,

Naveen Inuagnti.