Kuali Rice Development
  1. Kuali Rice Development
  2. KULRICE-1626

put doc type on doc header and make the maintainable consistently aware of it

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Closed Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 0.9.3, KFS Release 3.0
    • Component/s: Development
    • Labels:
      None
    • Similar issues:
      KULRICE-4314Make document header fields flexible by doc type
      KULRICE-503put a handleRouteStatusChange change methods on Maintainable with empty implementations on KualiMaintainableImpl
      KULRICE-3693Put back in ' escaping in new doc search code
      KULRICE-9455Ingesting a doc type needs to flush additional caches
      KULRICE-3319Determine if we need to do some work on the KimTypeService interface to make return types more consistent
      KULRICE-13941Person Doc - The Delegation Type Code column header is replaced by Actions column header
      KULRICE-4087Maint doc edit/copy needs to be JPA aware
      KULRICE-5715Implement caching of legacy KEW rules on the RuleService by "doc type + rule template"
      KULRICE-7782Document Service superUserDisapproveDocument is not consistent with disapproveDocument
      KULRICE-1419improve ability to report on, understand, maintain workflow configuration
    • Rice Module:
      KNS
    • Application Requirement:
      KFS

      Description

      Update the methods called by the KualiMaintenanceDocumentAction to pass the document through to the maintainable so that actions may be taken on it as necessary.

      Add document type code (4 character code) to the document header (FP_DOC_HEADER_T). If possible, set from the DD upon document creation.

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Jonathan Keller added a comment -

          Completed on the rice-release-0-9-3-kfs-080211-br branch.

          Show
          Jonathan Keller added a comment - Completed on the rice-release-0-9-3-kfs-080211-br branch.
          Hide
          Aaron Godert (Inactive) added a comment -

          A couple quick questions on this...
          1.) What's the deal with that branch?
          2.) Also was this the workflow doc typ or the fp doc type? If the latter, why do this when I thought that was going away with the removal of the fp_doc_typ_t table in Rice???

          Show
          Aaron Godert (Inactive) added a comment - A couple quick questions on this... 1.) What's the deal with that branch? 2.) Also was this the workflow doc typ or the fp doc type? If the latter, why do this when I thought that was going away with the removal of the fp_doc_typ_t table in Rice???
          Hide
          Ailish Byrne added a comment -

          1) that branch is what i mentioned in our meeting today - we created it to enable ourselves to regularly pull changes into kfs for testing without impacting others and to isolate ourselves from getting other changes that are going on every time we pull. we plan to weekly or so merge and then create a new branch so we don't have to deal with merging up to our branch from 0.9.3
          2) yup, we'll have to deal with fp_doc_header_t and fp_doc_type_t during the extraction. unfortunately, we can't wait any longer for that. i have this on the agenda for our integration meeting tomorrow morning.

          Show
          Ailish Byrne added a comment - 1) that branch is what i mentioned in our meeting today - we created it to enable ourselves to regularly pull changes into kfs for testing without impacting others and to isolate ourselves from getting other changes that are going on every time we pull. we plan to weekly or so merge and then create a new branch so we don't have to deal with merging up to our branch from 0.9.3 2) yup, we'll have to deal with fp_doc_header_t and fp_doc_type_t during the extraction. unfortunately, we can't wait any longer for that. i have this on the agenda for our integration meeting tomorrow morning.
          Hide
          Eric Westfall added a comment -

          If those branches aren't needed anymore after you've merged them down, we could probably delete them after 0.9.3 is released to prevent a proliferation of branches in the repository (although that will probably happen regardless because of how much branching we do Subversion supports non-destructive branch deletion from what I can tell.

          Show
          Eric Westfall added a comment - If those branches aren't needed anymore after you've merged them down, we could probably delete them after 0.9.3 is released to prevent a proliferation of branches in the repository (although that will probably happen regardless because of how much branching we do Subversion supports non-destructive branch deletion from what I can tell.
          Hide
          Ailish Byrne added a comment -

          yes, i often delete kfs branches that are just for temporary use, although not as often as i should i'm happy to make it part of our process each time we create and start using a new one to delete the prior

          Show
          Ailish Byrne added a comment - yes, i often delete kfs branches that are just for temporary use, although not as often as i should i'm happy to make it part of our process each time we create and start using a new one to delete the prior
          Hide
          Eric Westfall added a comment -

          I'm not overly concerned about it, just something that popped into my head. If it's easy for you guys to make it part of your process then I would say go for it, otherwise we can just go through and delete them all once your work is merged back into the main 0.9.3 line.

          Show
          Eric Westfall added a comment - I'm not overly concerned about it, just something that popped into my head. If it's easy for you guys to make it part of your process then I would say go for it, otherwise we can just go through and delete them all once your work is merged back into the main 0.9.3 line.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Jonathan Keller
              Reporter:
              Jonathan Keller
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              1 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:
                Start Date:

                Structure Helper Panel