User should not release the PR which is created by him

Hi
We didnu2019t use work flow functionality for PR Release. So same user can create PR and release the same PR in our system. Our requirement is user should not release the PR which is created by him. I would like to put this control in system.
How can I achieve this requirement?
Thanks
Jeny

Hi Ravi
Thanks for your reply. but they need to have authroization for PR release . bec they are eligble to release PR as per delegation of authroity. but they should not release their own PR . they can relase other's PR within their level.
Jeny.

Similar Messages

Is it possible to make sure the app runs all the time either in the foreground or background, User should not have the flexibility to stop it from running

Hello all:
I have an enterprise app and i need to make sure it runs all the time.
If the app is not running i should silently make sure it restarts again.
Any ideas on how it can be done. It is an enterprise app
Thanks

Hmmm....
How about wrapping all of your dll calls in a single VI (or an Action Engine ) and make sure the VI's thread is NOT set for "Same as caller".
"Threadconfig.vi" (sp?) will also let you dictate the number of threads associated with an execution system. Set your target thread for "1".
Not sure on the above.
Please correct me if this is wrong!
Ben
Message Edited by Ben on 07-19-2007 08:26 AM
Ben Rayner
I am currently active on.. MainStream Preppers
Rayner's Ridge is under construction

Should not fetch the records which has tran_efct_dte more than 550 days

I have a table BRKG_TRA AND below is the structure of the table
BRKG_ORDER_ID VARCHAR2(15 BYTE)
BRKG_ORDER_ID_CNTX_CDE VARCHAR2(10 BYTE)
BRKG_ACCT_SIDE_CDE CHAR(1 BYTE)
TRD_FTR NUMBER(15,9)
PGM_ORIG_TRAN_ID VARCHAR2(6 BYTE)
BRKG_OPT_OPEN_CLOS_CDE VARCHAR2(5 BYTE)
BRKG_ORDER_QTY NUMBER(17,4)
TRAN_ID VARCHAR2(20 BYTE)
TRAN_CNTX_CDE VARCHAR2(10 BYTE)
CRTE_PGM VARCHAR2(50 BYTE)
CRTE_TSTP DATE
UPDT_PGM VARCHAR2(50 BYTE)
UPDT_TSTP DATE
DATA_GRP_CDE VARCHAR2(10 BYTE)
TRAN_EFCT_DTE DATE

select * from <table name> where <dt_field> > sysdate - 550

Restrict the user should not allow to select No Excise entry tab in MIGO

Hi
how to restrict the user should not allow to select No Excise entry tab in MIGO
if the material Excisable user can bale to select the No Excise entry tab in MIGO . my requirement .... if the Pop come Please enter Excise Invoice number and Excise Invoice Date user should not change the No Excise how to restrict pls advise me
@sakhi

These are the options provided by SAP keeping in mind Indian Scenario. Sometimes, vendor forget to send excise invoice copy with the material, in such case, you can select 'Only Part I'.
Even if you have maintain vendor excise details & material excise details (By mistake) in J1ID, system will throw an error message, excise invoice value is zero. In such case, we can select option 'No excise entry'.
Your requirement can't be fulfilled in standard way. Even if you go for any Z- developement, you will lose the option.

User should not be voiding the dispute created by other User

Hi,
I having an Issue at my work place.I have got a Requirement from the Finance Functional Folks that the user should be able to create the dispute case and also void the case created by him.But the user should not be able to void the dispute case created by the Other user.
As of now when I am testing the user is able to void the dispute case created by him and also void the dispute case created by other user.So now I am trying to restrict so that user should not be able to void the dispute case created by other user.
In the Roles Built at work place I have fdm_coll01-collections Management and also udm_dispute-dispute manamgement T-codes built in One Role.can any one of you let me know at which authorization object this can be restricted as I am having a hard time trying to find out.
In Ideal SAP World what my idea was a Dispute case created by the user in Production should not be allowed to void the dispute case.so creating a dispute case and voiding a dispute case should be treated differently and should be done by different persons in an organization.

In Ideal SAP World what my idea was a Dispute case created by the user in Production should not be allowed to void the dispute case.so creating a dispute case and voiding a dispute case should be treated differently and should be done by different persons in an organization.
So why not talk back to your FI Folks. Also check with your Compliance Team.
But anyhow, I do not see in the real world a conflict of duties by giving access to both creating a Dispute and voiding a dispute and more over voiding a dispute is considered critical since it would allow to Release Blocked Orders.
But the user should not be able to void the dispute case created by the Other user.
If every transcation and conversation with a Customer is recorded in the Collections Management system, I do not see a requirement for the same Team Member having access to close a dispute created by other user.
AB.

]The requirement is that users should not allow them to save if the indic

hi guys
when u are doing GR in the excise tab page if u find an icon (yellow one) called more data if u click that one u go to other screen where u will find a tab page named miscellaneous ther u can see MRP indicator check.
The requirement is that users should not allow them to save if the indicator is not ticked.
help me guys
kiran

You can either use Tcode NACE for output procedure pr follow following path in SPRO:
IMG - SD - Basic Functions - Output control - Output Determination - Maintain Output Determination for Billing Documents - Maintain Output Determination Procedure
There for your output procedure used for the desired output type maintain requirement routine as 62 : Billing doc released to acctng.
This requirement is met if the billing document is complete checking the header, pricing, and all items and has already been passed to financial accounting. The requirement also checks that the document is not relevant for an invoice list. This requirement can be assigned to billing document output condition types that should only be processed when the billing document is complete and forwarded to accounting. This requirement can only be used with billing documents.
Regards
JP

User should not be able to change the payment terms

Dear All,
My issue is that user should not be able to change the payment terms in any of the document.I have tried to do it through authorization but it is not working out.
Mona.

Dear Mona,
This may only be done through SP_Transaction_Notification.
Thanks,
Gordon

User should not be able to import a request.

Dear Forum,
We have a role created with all the transaction (*) given to a user.
We want to revoke/restrict the authorization to import a request. User be able to create/edit/release the request but should not be able to import. This should happen without changing to existing (*) but at the same time user should not able to import.
<removed_by_moderator>
Regards,
DD
Edited by: Julius Bussche on Feb 18, 2009 10:48 AM

> And in the new role you can restrict the user.
I suspect the how was the original question. S_TRANSPRT is the (already given) answer. Deriving will do nothing for that object as not one of its fields is organizational. Besides that, restricting some more objects to make sure the user cannot create and/or use any workarounds is essential to make this work properly.
The additional request This should happen without changing to existing (*) scares me a bit. Why do these users need over 70000 transactions?

Delivery Qty. should not Exceed the PO Qty.

Hi All
My requirement is that just like Sales Order, incase of STO the delivery Quantity (delivery creayed through VL04) should not exceed the Balance Quantity PO quantity (where PO Quantity less Already delivered Qty = Balance Qty). Is there any standard customisation or Exit is available for this??
Regards
AA

Dear AA
I have searched in MM forum and found this thread which is relevant to your requirement
Forum post in ERP - Logistics Materials Management (MM): STO - How to control Over delivery ?
STO - How to control Over delivery ?
Hope this helps you
SAP has a logic for not controlling the over delivery in STO in standard (unlike sales order to delivery we have the controls in Zero VLP or 0VLP for this) because STO happens between plants of a same company code or different company codes .The movement of stocks are between plants But in a normal sales the delivery happens to a customer who is actually a third person and hence a user can misuse the delivery quantity
A plant and an external customer cannot be treated as same
Hence in SAP standards over delivery is not controlled in standard settings like item category etc
Regards
Raja

User should not have edit access in EAS

Hello Gurus,
My requirement is : I or my team mates are not supposed to have any access in EAS to make any changes to applications / databases on an Essbase server. i.e. I should only be able to view outline, see statistics, see if any sessions are running etc. I should not be able to copy application, create application, delete application, edit outlines etc.
Please let me know if there is a way to do it.
Thanks

Viewing Active User Sessions
"The Sessions window displays a list of active sessions. If you have Administrator permissions, the window lists active user sessions for all users on the Essbase Server. If you have Application Manager permissions, the window lists active sessions for all users, including yourself, who are connected to any application for which you have Application Manager permissions."
Cheers
John

Work order should not update the fields in PR

Hi Gurus
My requirements is that workorder should not updates the purchasing data fields in PR do not go to the shoping cart. How can make it possible.
Thanks in Advance

Hi,
I am not sure of your requirement clearly but check up the below user exits :-
COZF0001 Change purchase req. for externally processed operation
COZF0002 Change purchase req. for externally procured component
or BADI :- IWO1_PREQ_BADI BAdI for Manipulation of P.Reqs from Orders + Networks ,SE18
regrds
pushpa

ATTENTION!! RECEIVED FRAUDULENT EMAIL PRETENDING TO BE APPLE!! I received an email informing of a purchase made on my account and telling me to change my password if did not purchase the item, which I had not. I have received valid emails from Apple

ATTENTION!! RECEIVED FRAUDULENT EMAIL PRETENDING TO BE APPLE!! I received an email informing of a purchase made on my account and telling me to change my password if did not purchase the item, which I had not. I have received valid emails from Apple in the past asking letting me know a purchase had been made and asking if I had made the purchase, but the item listed has alway been a purchase that I had made. Since I had received similar emails in the past, I didn't think anything of it. Because I had not purchased the item listed, I immediately clicked on the link in order to change my password, which has been suggested in authentic emails i had received from Apple in the past. The site I was redirected to was exactly the same as the Apple site where you go to change your password. I entered my userID and password and it stated a verification email would be sent, if it was not sent click "resend email." When I did not receive an email, after about 10 seconds I went to the Apple site and followed the SAME EXACT step on pages that were IDENTICAL to the FRAUDULENT website I apparently had just been at. When I clicked "Send verification email," I DID receive an email within seconds, which had a special link that brought me to a page where I could change my password, which I did. I later compared a legitimate email to the FRAUDULENT email and I DID FIND A DIFFERENCE, BUT IT WAS ALMOST UNNOTICEABLE unless you were really, really looking. I doubt it would be noticed by anyone if not comparing it closely to a real email. THE DIFFERENCE WAS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AUTHENTIC EMAIL, THERE WERE THREE LINKS THAT COULD BE SELECTED - My Apple ID/Support/Privacy Policy. ON THE FRAUDULENT EMAIL THESE LINKS WERE NOT PRESENT!!! Just today I received an email from Apple stating my password had been changed today. I did not change my password today. When I changed after getting the fake email, I did not think about my SECURITY QUESTIONS!!! If you forget your Apple password, you are able to answer the security questions in place of your ID and you get a confirmation email. Even though I changed my password within a one minute when I did not get a confirmation email with a link to change my password right away and I went dierctly to Apple's site, apparently it was enough time to take all the information on my account - INCLUDING MY DEBIT CARD NUMBER, WHICH HAD BEEN REQUIRED WHEN I INITIALLY SET UP THE ACCOUNT!!! Today I received a call from VISA FRAUD PROTECTION asking about strange activity on my account and stating they were concerned and wanted to ensure I had used the account. I HAD NOT, AND ALL THE MONEY IN MY BANK ACCOUNT HAD BEEN STOLEN!!!!! I am writing this in hopes that many people will see it and NOT FALL VICTIM TO THIS SCAM. Please pay close attention to any emails you supposedly receive from Apple - If the links "MY APPLE ID/SUPPORT/PRIVACY POLICY," PLEASE DO NOT ASSUME IT IS AN AUTHENTIC EMAIL FROM APPLE. I suggest you immediately forward the email to apple, which I didn't do because this happened days ago. Nothing was taken from my money that was already on the Apple account, and nothing had been taken from my checking account. I guess I assumed there had been something wrong with the link in the email directing me to where I could change my password, plus I had gone to the valid Apple website and changed my password for real, and I guess I was thinking that changing my password would prevent someone from being able to acces my account info. PLEASE DO NOT FALL VICTIM TO THIS SCAM AS I DID!!!!

No need for alarm. There are several folks a day posting like threads. Most folks know these phishing attempts for what they are and merely delete with prejudice.
To the bottom line... if you wish - and I am sure Apple will take notice - you should FORWARD the email to [email protected] and delete.
CCC

I have loaded Lion on my MacBook and the new trackpad functions work only on one ordinary account or user and not on the admin account. The trackpad preferences are well set. What can I do?

I have loaded Lion on my MacBook and the new trackpad functions work only on one ordinary account or user and not on the admin account. The trackpad preferences are well set. What can I do?

iCloud should still help you reduce some hard drive space. Just select "optimize" in the icloud tab in Mac Photo App preferences.
Granted, not the same as completely offloading your library to a back-up drive at your location.
Good Luck!

In the Firefox browser, when i click button in ADF page, then popup the OAF page in iframe tag,and then when i click the PPR bean in OAF page, then Firefox browser reload to ADF page. This is not the right response,browser should not reload the ADF pa

In the Firefox browser, when i click button in ADF page, then popup the OAF page in iframe tag,and then when i click the PPR bean in OAF page, then Firefox browser reload to ADF page. This is not the right response,browser should not reload the ADF page.It should stays in OAF page or goto another OAF page. and in other browser such ad IE,We get the right response.

hello, normally such issues are caused by a firewall/security software which doesn't recognize & therefore blocks new firefox versions. please remove all program rules for firefox from your firewall and let it detect the new version of the browser again.
[[Fix problems connecting to websites after updating Firefox]]

Payment run - should not clear the open item but should post payment doc

Hi Gurus,
Can you please help me , on how to acheive like when payment run F110 post the payment doc it should not close the open item rather keep that open item as open item , but hsould be be paid by payment doc posted through payment run F110.
Have any one of you had similar requirement ..? FICO gurus help me to acheiev this .. any exit /BADI ..or ideas..
Appreciate your help in advance

HI ,
Thanks for your reply , but still I am not clear on that.
reason they want to keep this open to be kept as open item , so that item will be picked up by dunning run ..
Basically the open invoice is being cleared by payment doc which was generated by payment run. If we look at BSEG in the open item record BSEG-AUGBL = will have the clearing doc number , and in addition to that BSEG will have created another record for the clearing doc as well .
May be since open invoice record is being updated with clearing doc (AUGBL ) , I belive its not shown up as open item .
Somehow this item should be kept as open item ... that is the req and also paid item payment reference should be transfered to Bill of exchange as well.
Hope you have clear background of my req...
Tnanks in advance ,

User should not release the PR which is created by him

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for