Kuali Rice Development
  1. Kuali Rice Development
  2. KULRICE-1153

add api methods to identify all the places a given user appears in workflow, to remove a user from workflow, and to replace a user in workflow

    Details

    • Type: Task Task
    • Status: Closed Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Won't Fix
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: Not version specific
    • Component/s: Development
    • Labels:
      None
    • Similar issues:
      KULRICE-856add api methods to identify all the places a given user appears in workflow, to remove a user from workflow, and to replace a user in workflow
      KULRICE-889New workflow API
      KULRICE-2196Create new workflow user service which uses KIM APIs
      KULRICE-967Add ability to query workflow for document status via the API
      KULRICE-5057improved user experience after clicking a workflow action
      KULRICE-4552Allow workflow user preference defaults to be configured
      KULRICE-1155expose doc search capabilities via workflow api
      KULRICE-1157Inactivating a Kuali User should remove active delegations & org reviews
      KULRICE-4704User Interface for KC Workflow
      KULRICE-1006can't configure workflow user capabilites through universal user service
    • Rice Module:
      KEW, KIM
    • Application Requirement:
      Rice

      Description

      http://beatles.uits.indiana.edu:8081/jira/browse/EN-192
      http://beatles.uits.indiana.edu:8081/jira/browse/EN-319

      We need the ability to determine if a KualiUser is a part of a review hierarchy. This is in support of KULCOA-979.
      The requirement in that JIRI is that that before we are allowed to mark a KualiUser as inactive, we first check to confirm that that KualiUser is not a part of a review hierarchy.

      This apparently means to check that the user is not associated with the workflow for any documents.
      The problem is that there is currently no clean way ( using workflow services) to determine whether or not a person is associated with any workflow document(s).

      There are probably additional requirement details remaining to be defined such as:

      • Are we only concerned if workflow indicates that the KualiUser is "active"ly associated with a document. ?
      • Are there effective date considerations?
      • What is the scope of document types that we are concerned with? - just Kuali documents?
      • What would be the inputs and outputs of new Kuali Workflow Services?
        e.g. Would a service just return a yes or no indication?
        or would it return a list of document types associated with the specified user?

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Aaron Godert (Inactive) added a comment -

          Eric please confirm that this is a long term issue. Also, would part if not all of this be solved by the global remove/replace KEW enhancement? Also, would KIM longterm provide these?

          Show
          Aaron Godert (Inactive) added a comment - Eric please confirm that this is a long term issue. Also, would part if not all of this be solved by the global remove/replace KEW enhancement? Also, would KIM longterm provide these?
          Hide
          Eric Westfall added a comment -

          Jerry, can you follow up with Dan on whether or not this is a requirement for KFS 4.0.

          Show
          Eric Westfall added a comment - Jerry, can you follow up with Dan on whether or not this is a requirement for KFS 4.0.
          Hide
          Dan Lemus (Inactive) added a comment -

          Eric,

          I don't believe this is functionality required at this point in KFS 4 development.

          Show
          Dan Lemus (Inactive) added a comment - Eric, I don't believe this is functionality required at this point in KFS 4 development.
          Hide
          Eric Westfall added a comment -

          This issue is quite ancient. I'm going to take the fix version off of this and mark it as "Won't Fix". If the requirement for this functionality comes up in the future (and I think that some of this has been addressed in KIM) we can address it then.

          Show
          Eric Westfall added a comment - This issue is quite ancient. I'm going to take the fix version off of this and mark it as "Won't Fix". If the requirement for this functionality comes up in the future (and I think that some of this has been addressed in KIM) we can address it then.
          Hide
          Eric Westfall added a comment -

          Whoops, incorrectly resolved as fixed the first time. Marking as won't fix.

          Show
          Eric Westfall added a comment - Whoops, incorrectly resolved as fixed the first time. Marking as won't fix.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Jerry Neal (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              Dan Lemus (Inactive)
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              1 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Time Tracking

                Estimated:
                Original Estimate - 3 days
                3d
                Remaining:
                Remaining Estimate - 3 days
                3d
                Logged:
                Time Spent - Not Specified
                Not Specified

                  Structure Helper Panel