cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Read only

Why is condition requirement code sometimes modification?

pokrakam
Active Contributor
0 Likes
1,549

When creating custom requirements for conditions (Pricing, output, etc.), the system creates an editable include in SAP's namespace with the condition number in it's name, e.g. RV61B999 for requirement 999. Done it a few times in the past without a problem.

But I was surpised to discover that this system asked for a modification key to edit the code for a custom requirement; and even more surprised to find that this varies from one requirement to the next. Most odd.

So we have some that have the modification stamp, like:

FORM KOBED_923.
*{   INSERT         DEVK123456

Yet others are regular editable includes:

*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
*       FORM KOBED_919                                                *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
*       ........                                                      *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
FORM kobed_919.

Given that I've found alternating styles looking at conditions created over several years, this is not something that changed in a particular version of SAP. Nor can I find any obvious differences in the configuration.

So my question: Why are some conditions treated as modifications and others aren't?

For what it's worth, the particular ones we're currently working with are output conditions.

View Entire Topic
eduardo_hinojosa
Active Contributor

Hi Mike

According Note 327220 - VOFM function and its objects, point 2.2.1. under the title 'SSCR object registration' the reason is these objects are asigned to SAP development class or package.

Regards

Eduardo

pokrakam
Active Contributor
0 Likes

Thanks Eduardo,

As per my other responses, all have registration keys, and all of them are assigned to the same package. Yet some are modifications or repairs, others aren't.

Regards,

Mike