I want to trigger a NetSuite workflow when the user sets the value of a field, but I don't want to have them submit first. The Workflow state builder looks like it has useful options but I can't get it to work.
There's some useful looking blog posts around but a lot of them seem out of date.
Update - more info
My primary issue is this one: Restrict what customers an employee can see (NetSuite)
The hack I'm currently looking at is populating a custom Transaction Column Field that I've added to a custom Time Recording form. The idea is to load this field on the UI with only valid projects (not customers as well), and this I have been able to do.
The problem is I still (as far as I can tell) still need to populate the "Customer" field, which is mandatory; I'm also assuming that if I don't do that then any time that is recorded won't go against the project. I had thought that if the user selects the project they want then I can populate the customer field with that value. I hate this as an approach but I can't see how else to do it. I do have coding experience (including JavaScript) but haven't made the leap into SuiteScript yet.
You won't be able to do this in a Workflow, as they are currently limited to only work with body level fields and cannot modify Transaction Column Fields (aka sublists).
You should be able to achieve this with a Client Side Script though.
Source (Netsuite login required).
Sublist changes will be available for transactions in the 2018.1 release sometime in Feb/Mar.
Related
I have a field on one of my base page types which I need to update programmatically from an external data feed, so that it can be included in my Smart Search index.
The documents are versioned, but I want to update the published value of this field regardless of checkout state, and obviously avoid any sort of overwrite when documents are checked in.
The field will not appear on the editor form -- or ideally, would conditionally display for Global Admins.
It appears that using the API to update the document without doing a CheckOut fails silently. However if I do a Checkout/Update/CheckIn on a checkout-out page, the author will lose their work I assume?
Any way to handle this "versionless" field via the Kentico data model and API?
I don't think there is a way around updating checked out pages. You can update the page type table directly, but as you mentioned, it will be overwritten when they check in. You could update the version history I believe to make changes to the current data that is checked out, but again, I think that will be lost if the user cancels.
The only way I can think of to solve your issue is to create another table that maps the values you want to the page. Then you don't have to worry about the pages being checked out, you just need to grab the documentID or something. Since the value isn't displayed to the editor, you just have a field that does a lookup on this table.
The preferred and right way is using the API but as you stated, it causes problems if a user has something already checked out and working on it or it's in workflow and not published yet.
If the field you're updating is page type specific, there is one thing specifically I can think of and that's going directly to the database to the page type's database field and perform an update to that field.
Note: this is not recommended unless you know specifically what you're doing and have done full testing on it
The down side of going direct to the database is this will not update the current version since you're using check in/out and workflow. You will also need to update the checked out and current version which means you need to:
Go to the Document itself in the cms_documents table and get the document you are working with.
Then using the fields DocumentCheckedOutVersionHistoryID and DocumentPublishedVersionHistoryID' you can get the version history IDs of the document from theCMS_VersionHistory` table.
Then you can perform an update to the CMS_VersionHistory and your custom page type fields.
You will then need to look in the CMS_WorkflowHistory table and find out if that document is in workflow and in what step.
After you have that workflow history step, use the VersionHistoryID field to go back to the CMS_VersionHistory table and update that record with your data.
Again, not an elegant solution since you are using check in/out and workflow but after some trial and error and testing you should be able to figure it out.
UPDATE
You may also be able to add a custom table or some other linked database table which will allow you to create a global handler. The linked table would be where you perform your updates via API and other calls without versioning or workflow. Then when a user updates a specific page type you could do a check to see when the last time that linked table was updated and update the field(s) you need on update of that particular page (of course by node and document IDs).
Unfortunately you'll have to check it in and out with API. See examples here.
Also you might need to publish it in order to reflect changes on the live site.
I am looking to create a workflow that will populate any mandatory fields that do not contain data when a company is deactivated. The mandatory fields are either not populated because of legacy data or because the mandatory fields have changed since the record was created.
The issue I get is that the mandatory field check takes place before the workflow is triggered.
My workflow looks like follows:
If Status = Inactive
If Company Name does not contain data
Then update to ‘Test’
I have come up with a possible solution:
• Create a new button in the ribbon that runs the workflow on-demand and apply permissions to this button.
If possible though I would like to do this through a workflow that is triggered on clicking of the ‘Deactivate’ button. Any ideas are welcome.
In your situation the record will not be saved until the mandatory fields are filled, and a workflow cannot be triggered if a record is not saved first.
An approach to solve this situation is to write a JavaScript attached to the OnSave event, but you need a rule to be able to identify the legacy records, so this JavaScript (that will fill the mandatory fields for you) will not run for normal records.
This approach is not tested, but with some tweaks should work.
On CRM in the appointments you can click on the regarding tab to open up that appointments Case details.
Is it possible to add the CASE number for that appointment to the appointments page. Reason being every time I want to see the case number I need to click on regarding tab and open up another webpage.
Would be nice to just have the case number appear on the appointment page, anyway on the page is fine.
Is this possible?
thanks
I agree with Alex and Disagree with Darren, although a plugin would get the job done it seems very excessive for what you are trying to accomplish.
The best way to do this between entities is to use the mapping fields between entity relationships however i don't believe CRM allows this between case and appointment in which case i would create a workflow.
Create a workflow on appointment firing on create or on-change of the regarding field, pull the case number field from the case entity when regarding is on case. This workflow will fire every time this event happens however you can build some extra logic around it and if there isn't a case entity no data will be pulled through.
Hope this helps
You can write a plugin on create and/or update of the regarding field on Appointment. Within this plugin you can check if the regarding field is populated and if so if the entity type is incident. If it is, obtain the Case Number (using the OrganizationService) and set the value of a custom attribute on the triggering Appointment.
Add the custom attribute to the Appointment form. Generally this kind of reference information goes in the header section but it's entirely up to you. If you don't place it there make sure you mark it as read-only.
Depending on your use case you may also want to check in the plugin when the regarding field changes. If the regarding is removed or changed you'll need to make sure you update the case number on the Appointment to reflect this.
I have scripts that react off of, for example, a client Recalc client event. For example, on my form I have a subtab that users may add or remove items from. Based on actions on this subtab (housing a child record of the parent) I would like a field on the parent to update (say to show a total from the children records).
As I was saying, these events seem to work fine if in edit mode but they do not work correctly in view mode. (even in view mode these child records have a "Delete" option at the end of each row in the subtab. This was provided by netsuite by default.
I wondered if anyone had any tips to best allow this parent field to update real time while in updating the subtab rows with the form in view mode.
Thanks.
You can make a custom field on the parent (header) whose value is determined by saved search. For instance, make a saved search that totals the line values by transaction. Be sure to make it filter by transaction in the Available Filters tab. Make the search public so everyone can use it.
Create the custom field that sources the total from the saved search. Make sure to uncheck the "Store Value" checkbox, as you don't want to store the data, you want to reference the search results. You do this on the Validation and Defaulting tab. You'll see a field for Saved Search there. Choose the search you created above.
As you remove/add/change lines on the transaction, the field updates accordingly. In essence, you don't need a single line of code to make this work - it's all in how you create the search and the custom field that references it.
I have a similar situation posted here.
The NetSuite team answered me by email, and it happens you can't really achieve this on the view mode: some API methods are not available. Their suggestion to my case (and I think it applies to yours too) was really to force a refresh on the whole page.
Of course, you can always achieve this accessing the DOM elements directly, but this isn't a best practice, as your code can stop working if these elements change on a version update.
I had the same problem, I'm not able to restrict on view or remove edit button. But, there was one alternative solution with workflows, you can deploy workflow on child record edit mode restrictions, then if the user clicks edit on view then the record will not be available to edit. This concern will apply to custom record as well.
In my SharePoint List, I have an "Employee" column that is a User type field. I would like to add some custom Business Logic to the processing of this field.
Currently, when the user adds a row, I check to see if the user is an Employee or a Manager and then change the behavior on this column accordingly. I do this by statically rendering the field in my custom "ListForm Rendering Template", just before my custom ListFieldIterator. I simply use a standard SharePoint FormField (and FormLabel) control. In the markup of the FormField control, I specify the FieldName (Employee) and an event handler for the Load event. In this Load event, I will check to see if the current user is an Employee or Manager (using two different SharePoint groups). If the user is an Employee I set the value of the field to the current user (this part works perfectly). I also want to change the field so it can't be modified. I thought I might be able to just change the ControlMode on the field (in the code of the OnLoad Event Handler) to Display, but for some reason this has no effect. The field still renders with the full, people picker editor. Am I not changing the fields control mode soon enough? Or is this simply not the correct approach? The other logic I want to put in is if the user is a Manager, I would like to allow that user to select the person from a list (SharePoint group) of Employees. It may be easier to just use the people picker and limit the selectable users to that group. (I think I can do this with the SelectionGroup property.) Although, it would be better if I could just provide a dropdownlist of users, which I could possibly do with a hidden dropdownlist that I would show and event handlers that I could use (handle event selectedindexchanged) to pull the value selected and populate the (now hidden) Employee (user) field. Does this approach make sense? Assuming all that will work, the real difficulty I am having is with changing the ControlMode (rendering) on the field (when the user is an employee) to a label or some kind of read only control, which is how that field renders when viewing the row, which is why I think if I can just trick the control into thinking it is in Display mode then it should work perfectly!
I am still learning SharePoint, but I am very proficient in ASP .Net. This is why I would like to keep my customizations in this Custom Rendering Template, using code behind and leverage my existing skill set as much as properly.
Any thoughts, opinions or advice? Does anyone know why I can't get the column to switch the "Control Mode"?
I do not think that I fully understand your scenario. Some code samples could help.
But anyway it sounds like you want some heavy customizations of the user field. In that case you might want to have a look at creating a custom field with all its advantages and disadvantages. Have a look at MSDN: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg132914.aspx
Another option might be - in case you do not want to re-use this column in many list definitions - that you can get away with your custom rendering template and create a custom create/edit form where you implement the specific edit behaviour for the field (plain ASP.NET with some SharePoint controls). Here is a nice walk-through on how to grab a custom edit form from SharePoint designer: http://community.bamboosolutions.com/blogs/sharepoint-2010/archive/2011/05/12/sharepoint-2010-cookbook-how-to-create-a-customized-list-edit-form-for-development-in-visual-studio-2010.aspx
I hope this helps. Kr., Bernd.