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

Add ability to restrict when the owner can edit promotion objects

Add ability to restrict when the owner can edit promotion objects

The "Edit" action has been made available for Promotion Objects from PDMLink 11.0 M030 (CS19603). By default, admins and the owner of the Promotion Request are able to perform the edit. The problem for us now is that there is no way to restrict when the owner can perform the edit. We cannot have the owner add/remove promotion objects whenever they want. It must be restricted to the certain nodes such as Rework or perhaps by a custom lifecycle state.

 

I have created a case with PTC and they concluded it is not possible. Please add this functionality to restrict when the owner can edit promotion objects either by workflow node or by lifecycle state (through Policy Administration).

 

Thank you.

10 Comments
Level 7

The ability to allow edits at only certain nodes is essential. No edits should be allowed after an approval has been given, but edits are required after a rework is deemed necessary. Please add this functionality in the next release of PDMLink. 

Level 11

I haven't tested it but I would extend the Promotion Notice Lifecycle and add a set state robot in the workflow. Afterwards add some access rights to the appropriate state. Just so an idea. I also voted for the idea since I also can't understand why PTC this hasn't already released in the first release.

Level 14

I'm actually setting this up right now.  Simple matter of:

- add Rework state to the PR lifecycle template

- add Set State to Rework (and then back to Under Review) to the PR workflow template

- add ACL for PR at Rework state: Modify

 

Seems really odd that PTC put out the instruction for setting property and using this without addressing these simple steps. Disaster if you implement the Edit functionality without these additional configurations.

Level 7

Hi mlockwood-2,

 

I understand what you're doing is to allow the editing of the promotion objects for a custom state. I was planning to do the same only if it was possible to remove the ability to edit promotion objects for other lifecycle states. I tried doing that for the Under Review state (see image) but had no luck. Even with this rule set, the owner was able to edit promotion objects... Were you able to restrict the edit action for certain lifecycle states?

 

PR Policy Admin.png

 

Level 7

What if instead of "none" you explicitly "deny" access?

Level 14

I have it working perfectly now.

Very likely two things preventing you getting the desired results (not sure because I've changed our system extensively from OTB condition):

1. OTB, the Promotion Request lifecycle template has quite a few permissions to the Owner Role.  Have to look at and possibly remove those.  If you change the LC template, it will be applied automatically to all new PRs.

2. OTB, there are ACLs for Promotion Request for the "Team Members" pseudo role.  These apply to all Roles except Manager and Guest.

 

Make sure that Edit does not appear for any non-admin user at the Open or Under Review or other states.  Then address adding Modify for the Rework state.

Level 7

Thanks much for the tips, mlockwood-2! It was indeed the Promotion Request lifecycle template that had to be configured. Removing permissions there did the trick and took away the ability to edit the promotion objects from the owner. I also did try Sweiler's idea on denying access but it didn't work. My guess would be that the permission given in the lifecycle template overrides that in the Policy Administration. Thanks again!

Level 12
Status changed to: Current Functionality
 
Level 18

@JeffZemsky, is it accurate to calls this "current functionality" if it requires customization to the OOTB lifecycle template in order to achieve the desired result?  It would seem like it wouldn't be current functionality until after PTC updates the default lifecycle template to support this without customization.

Level 12

@TomU - Yes it is accurate.  While unfortunately the OOTB lifecycle takes some configuration all there is no gap in capability for this functionality.  We will take a look at the OOTB LC template in a future release.