Transport ownership change

Hello Gurus,
Would you kindly let me know your practices on the transport. Does you team lead takes the ownership of the transports AND in fact the ownership of all the underlying tasks? My understanding is that this is not only incorrect because it distorys the audit trail, who created that transport in case the transport causes a problem, etc.; but also an illegal practice as essentially what the team lead is doing is wiping out the history of what consultant did, and claiming that the work was done by him (the team lead, as it shows his name now and you can see the transport under the team-lead name and not the consultant).
Kindly respond, as I am in process of developing the best practices for my company for tracking and accountability and release of transports.
Thanks in advance for all your response.
saplover

Dear,
Here you are not asking any technical question. Rather, this is your process and team problem. Anyway, below is my answer:
Basically, to me it looks like your TL is not happy if anybody's name crops up after his/her work. We do not follow this kind of activities. In our process, all TRs are named after our consultants only strictly!
This helps us tracking all the changes done by each consultant or person.
Hope this would help you!
Regards,
Faisal

Similar Messages

Minority Interest on Ownership Change

Dear All,
How to achieve Minority Interest on Ownership Change in the same financial Year.
For Example: For April Ownership and Minority interest is 60% and 40% respectively and PROFIT is YTD 1000.
On that period, Minority will be calculated at 40% and value would be 400.
Next Period, May month - ownership has been changed to 80% and 20% and profit value is YTD 2000.
In this period, Minority should be calculated on two values, which 40% is on 1000 (april's value) and 20% on 1000 which May's value.
Total would be 400 + 200 = 600
How to achieve this in HFM. If we uncheck ConsolidateYTD in scenario view, then system will calculate minority as per the requirement. But, if we uncheck this, then ZeroviewforAdj and ZeroviewfornonAdj has to be periodic and any adjustment requiered, then only periodic value needs to be inputed. But, data load is happening with YTD values (TB values been loaded with YTD value). Any impact on Flow(P&L) / Balance (Balancesheet) accounts if we use periodic values for adjustment.
If we check ConsolidateYTD, then minority interest will be calculated at that month's minority interest % on YTD value.
If month is april then, 40% on 1000 and if month is may then 20% on 2000 = 400 ( which is not right on profit value).
Also, if we uncheck ConsolidateYTD, and having ZeroviewforAdj and ZeroviewfornonAdj with YTD will not give right figure.
Is any other way to approach or achieve minority interest calculation as shown above.
Kindly share your ideas and approach.
Regards,
Raj-

Hi Raj,
Although the manual mentions that ZeroView and ConsolidateYTD should be aligned, I don't think that Oracle should impose this. The reason is that the combination ConsolidateYTD = No with ZeroView = YTD works alright provided you keep some precautions. To make it clear lets consider this: ZeroView can impact two things:
1. future periods, not having and real data loaded (we can just ignore these periods - why bother consolidating them? so this is no problem).
2. intermediate empty periods, which is the case, when we keep both quarterly and monthly data in the same scenario, then periods intermediate to the quarters are left empty.
In any case, ZeroView impacts periods that you don't want to load data, if data is loaded to the period, there is no issue with calculating the consolidated numbers.
So, our discussion is limited to the second case, where we have quarterly data, intermediate months are zero ConsolidateYTD = No and ZeroView = YTD. Then as soon as you set the right consolidation options, your numbers will consolidate correctly in quarters. Lets say that we have numbers in March with 60% and June 40%. Provided that you also make April and May Active and apply the 40% from April through June, then everything calculates correctly. However, if you apply 60% to April and May and 40% to June or leave Active = No for April and May, then numbers will not calculate correctly.
In fact this is my preferred configuration, and it has never let me down.
-- Kostas

How to transport Parameter changes in a crystal report

Hi All,
Very Good morning!!!
I have designed a crystal report with static parameters. Earlier i used to have a dropdown kind of input selection for my parameters.
Now i got a new requirement for a direct input in the field....tht means no dropdown ...single date field is to be entered directly.
Accordingly i have removed the dropdown and changed to a single direct date field. I saved these changes to a request and transported to quality. Not sure whether the parameter changes are collected into a request.
Whereas i couldn't found any changes of my parameters in quality. They are as same dropdown manner in the quality whereas i need them to be a direct field date entry which did not affected the quality server after transporting the changes.
Could some one please let me know how to reflect these changes in quality server regarding parameter changes in a crystal report for BW.
Thanks in Advance.
Jitendra

Please re-post if this is still an issue or purchase a case and have a dedicated support
engineer work with your directly

Transport of changes in 3KEI

Hi All,
I made changes to 3KEI table, When i generate transport system is showing up objects in the request. System allows me to change directly in Quality & Development. But how can i transport new changes to Production? Is there any way or program to transport to production.
Its urgent please help.
Thanks

If you have captured the changed made in transaction 3KEI, release the transport request to QA, Check and if happy , move to production.
It does not matter, whether the QA is directly changeable or not. But, in order ensure the QA is test was good, ensure, that the QA is not changed while you are testing. Then move to PRD.

Transport and Change Management

Hello,
We need to modify our MDM structure (add fields and tables). We would like to avoid unloading the repository. Can we do that in our test environment and move to Production only the structure while keeping the data in Prod.
What is the Transport and Change Management patch? Is this what we need?
Thanks for your help!

Hello,
This is not possible, as there is no support for Transport and Change management. You will always need some down-time in production. But there are some strategies to reduce the down-time.
(1) You could use the Java ADMIN API to create a batch-script that performs the required repository modifications. Once you validate it works, unload your repository, run your program and load the repository again.
(2) Create a "slave" repository and re-direct your production users to that repository. Unload your production repository and make all changes. Once done, reload that repository and switch back. Remember that this will only help to keep a "look-up" only version of the production repository...
Regards
Dirk

Transporting Workflow changes to QA

Hi Experts,
I have some Qs regarding transporting the changes made to the Workflow.
My Question is that, a custom workflow has lot of requests associated with it ..( both customizing and workbench ).
Once my workflow has been transported to QA. Now i have to make sm changes to the send mail step.
I have made the change and linked it to a transportable workbench request.
Now releasing this request alone will move the change . Or i have to goto basic data and Active the Strt condition again and transport that too, so that the change works fine in QA ?
Hope my Qs is clear.
Regards,
Radhika.

I have made the change and linked it to a transportable workbench request.
Now releasing this request alone will move the change
Yes, there is no need of transporting again the linkage request.Only the changes are reflected to the other system when ever you try to export a request to other system.
And make sure each time you do a change and when the request is ported to the other system then run the TXn SWU_OBUF and refresh the organizational assignment . this makes the workflow environment to run smoothly.

STMS_QA - allow transport of change requests

Hi,
we have configured the quality assurance tool (TMS). Now the users must - allow - the transport of change requests into the productive SAP-system via
transaction STMS_QA.
If we transport objects via "transport of copies" (from another SAP-system) the QA doesnt work. The users can avoid the QA-System.
Does anyone know how I could define the transport routes to avoid this situation?
Thanks
Michael

put the Objects in this ( from another system )<b> "transport of copies"</b> request and give the TARGET System name .
It is simple process , if u are doing first time do it carefully .
after doing the process check the TARGET system.
Regards
Prabhu

Word file ownership changes after edit/save.

This may be a server issue more than Office, but I've come across some articles relating to this problem in Samba, and thought it might be similar.
I'm the Network Admin for a school district. We have a file server that is setup with a file and folder structure that allows students and teachers to access and share documents. One teacher came to me with a problem. Students are able
to create and save Word documents to an assignment folder. The teacher then goes into the document, makes changes and enters notes, then saves the document back to the folder, overwriting the original. The problem is that once she has done so,
the student can no longer access the document.
After investigation and testing, I've found that ownership of the file is changing from the student to the teacher. This is a problem based on the way that the ACL is set on the folder. The students' access is based in the creator/owner attribute.
The fact that the ownership is changing once the teacher opens and edits the document is causing the student to no longer have access to the file.
My question is, is there a setting or other change that can be made to Office so that ownership is not transferred to the teacher? Giving each user explicit rights to each file and/or folder isn't really an option when I have 3000 students to
deal with. Again, this may be a server side issue, but I've not seen this problem with other programs.

I'm picking this up because I have the exact same problem.
Students are given Write access to a folder (So they can save their work)
Teachers are given Modify acccess to a folder (so they can add comments, etc)
CREATOR/OWNER is given Read/Execute so students could read teacher comments, but not make changes to the document once it has been saved.
When I test it with my admin account, it works great. I can update the document and the student can open it to see my comments, but not change the document anymore without saving to a different location.
When I test it with a teacher account, the document changes ownership as soon as the teacher saves. Once the ownership changes, the student no longer has permissions through CREATOR/OWNER and they can't open the document to see the comments anymore.
I can't see why this works when my account makes the changes, but not when a teacher account does. We are doing the exact same things in Word.
Here is an example of the permsions as they exist on a sample document. In the example, my admin account (which works fine) gets it's permissions through BUILTIN\Administrators:
PS H:\> $acl = get-acl "L:\TeacherShare\S2 3(A) Study Hall - Half Year\Submissions\StudentWork.docx
PS H:\> $acl.access
FileSystemRights : ReadAndExecute, Synchronize
AccessControlType : Allow
IdentityReference : SCHOOL\StudentAccount
IsInherited : True
InheritanceFlags : None
PropagationFlags : None
FileSystemRights : Modify, Synchronize
AccessControlType : Allow
IdentityReference : LPS\TeacherAccount
IsInherited : True
InheritanceFlags : None
PropagationFlags : None
FileSystemRights : ReadAndExecute, Synchronize
AccessControlType : Allow
IdentityReference : LPS\School Principals
IsInherited : True
InheritanceFlags : None
PropagationFlags : None
FileSystemRights : ReadAndExecute, Synchronize
AccessControlType : Allow
IdentityReference : LPS\School Document Administrators
IsInherited : True
InheritanceFlags : None
PropagationFlags : None
FileSystemRights : FullControl
AccessControlType : Allow
IdentityReference : BUILTIN\Administrators
IsInherited : True
InheritanceFlags : None
PropagationFlags : None

Returncode of Transporting a change request

Dear developers,
do you know how to check the returncode when transporting a change request to test or productive system.
In my case I have the special problem that change requests will be transported in an async way so that the developer could not check in the SAP solution manager whether the transport is error free or canceled with an error.
Is there a way to switch the transport management in the solution manager to a synchronous mode?
Best regards,
Jens

Hi Ganesh,
Can I ask something about inactive object here?
I applied notes with SNOTE. But all objects are inactive.
When I activete them, The system requires accesskey.
How could this happen? And any solution for this?
I can't deapply the notes any more. coz it's bug fix for SNOTE.
If I do this, the system will be inconsistent, this happened beffore
Thanks
kaz,

Transport Query Changes Individually

In our environment, we have a SOX IT requirement that each change to a query is separately approved by the business user before it is moved to production. The transport request must be able to be directly linked to a change request management system where the approvals took place.
We have a large team. We use the BEx transport, and have set up several development classes to further refine the changes to queries but the problem is as follows:
If two developers work on separate queries changes at the same time, but both queries are in the same development class, those changes will be mixed (and locked) into the same BEx request. This makes it difficult to link one change to one request and another change to another request. If I then require the developers to collect their changes manually to put them in separate requests, they get errors because the objects are already locked in to the default request for that development class.
What I would like to do is to turn off the automatic recording of BEx changes so that the developers will all be forced to manually collect changes before moving. Or even better, if they make a change, they would be prompted as per a normal change to an object.
Has anyone encountered this problem before or have any suggestions as to how to resolve?

Hi,
You have to make sure that all the elements of the queries are captured in the transport request. For that, in transport connection, while capturing the query, filter on "ELEM" and include them in transport connection.
As for authorization, you will not have it except in development. Thatu2019s the reason why you can not change the query in GRA directly. You always have to transport the changes.
Regards,
Yogesh

BPC NW 7.5 Carry Forward and Ownership Changes

Hi Experts,
I had a query when we do carry forward say from DEC to JAN next year.
In this case if ownership changes for say one entity.Shouldn't the carry forward activity take that into account??
Entity_1 PCON 80% in 2009.DEC and PCON 100% in 2010.JAN
Normally how these group level ownership changes can be handled?
Regards,
RK
Edited by: Rakesh Kumar on Feb 6, 2012 10:37 AM

Hi Rakesh,
When executing the Balance Carry Forward (BCF) using a Data Manager package process chain you will select what ever Entities you want in desired package range of Data Manager. So this will gets processed.
Regards,
Raghu

After upgrade file/app. ownership changed to "unknown"

My G5 would not shut down so Apple support told me to do an archive and install without retaining settings. As a result of the archive and install many of my files and applications had the ownership changed to "unknown". Is this normal? What is the easy and safe way to fix this problem.
Thanks

I am pretty sure this is normal, but try calling Apple back on the same case to verify. To fix it, open a terminal window and type
whoami
this will tell you who you are logged in as. Say you are logged in as "bob" then type
chown -R bob ~bob

Issue with Info Object Transport after changing Data Type

Hi Experts,
We have a DSO which is running past 5 years. And recently(3 days back) we added new fields into that DSO. Delta loaded for last three days and new info object (Say XXX) data populated into DSO.
Now the problem is, We identified that, info object data type is not correct. We used data type NUMC instead of CHAR.So Character information is missing for that field.
Example:
Data from ECC: ABC123
Data Loaded to DSO: 123 (Missed character ABC)
So we deleted data from DSO and changed the info object data type in Development system.
And also I have deleted only last three days delta records from DSO and transported my info object to Production. But its giving error as: Info object contains data in DSO".
But that info object field is empty in DSO. I have already deleted last three days delta.
Do I need to Delete all 5 years data from DSO to change the data type of recently added new info object ?
Please give me your solutions and ideas to solve this issue.
Thank you,
Best Regards,
Santhosh

Hi Raman,
Thank you for your answer.
When I changed the data type of info object in Dev, I deleted the content of DSO. And same thing transported to QA as well. Before importing changed info object, I just deleted the content of DSO from QA. So transport done successfully QA.
But in Production we have a history of past 5 years. So I cant delete all contents of DSO.
So just deleted only the delta request's which contains data for that info object(3 days back, we moved that info object(NUMC data type) to production,So last 3 days delta only loaded for that info object). And tried to transport it. But it was failed. I am sure we need to drop all data from DSO, if I am interested to go with same info object.
I have some comments on your first approach,
1. If we delete info objects from Dev DSO and transport to Production will give transport failure, Why because, my previous transports errors clearly saying that info object contains data in DSO . So it wont allow to remove that info object from DSO.
2.We are using same info object technical name in BO Data federator also. So if we change add new info objects again we need to make changes with BO as well. I am thinking this point as my last option if i cant find any other solution.
Thank you.
Best Regards.

Problem in Transporting the changes in Payslip after inclusion of new WT

Dear Experts,
Here we have added the new wagetypes in Payslip Through Transction code PE51 in Dev Client.And the changes were saved in a Transport request.After movement to Quality the respective changes are not shown up.Then we checked the Transport request and is showing only the respective Payslip and is not showing any config part in the TP Request.
Could you please tell me the way of inclusion of Changes in the Transport Reqest.
Please advice.
Regards,
Vikram.

Dear Sikindar,
Thanks for the reply.Already we have added the wagetypes in the Payslip of DEV Server.
What should i do now.Shall i delete the WT in the Form from DEV and save them ina new request and adding of the same Wt in the same new Transport request .
After modifications ..What should i do now(After clicking the Red Van Button)
Please addvice.
V Sai

Transport layer change ?

Is there any function module or class methods to chnge the tansport layer of a package. I need to change the transport layer from a program.
Best Regards,
Sreeram

>
Sreeram Manoharan wrote:
> Hello Florian ,
>
> I know to change it from SE80. I have mentioned that i need to change from a program.Read the question properly.
>
> Best regards,
> sreeram
Yes Florian,
read properly! You should have known he already knows how to do it through SE80. Anyone who reads this knows it, so why don't you? We all even know why he needs to do it through a program and not through SE80.
Please hug me!

Transport ownership change

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for