OMW is Cursed

hotm6654

Well Known Member
I didn't want to launch into some huge criticism of OMW, so I won't. But
quite frankly, I hate OMW. I want Object Librarian, Object Transfer and
Promotion Manager back. To me it feels like the marketing of New Coke in
+/-1983.

Anyway. In previous posts someone mentioned some undocumented INI settings
to get OL/OT/PM back. Can anyone tell me if these settings are still
working at SP14.2? I can't get them to work for some reason. If so, please
post them again.


JD Nowell
OW: B7332
ES: AS400 V4R4 CO: DB2/400 SP: 11.2
Users: 250 TSE Users: 100
 

hotm6654

Well Known Member
Thanks. I was using the fastpath abbreviation for Object Librarian (i.e.
OL) instead of P960 and that is why it did not work.





JD Nowell
OW: B7332
ES: AS400 V4R4 CO: DB2/400 SP: 11.2
Users: 250 TSE Users: 100
 

hotm6654

Well Known Member
BOK,

I just have a couple of questions for you:

1. How many developers (using JDE tools-RDA, FDA, etc.) do you have
developing on OW?
2. In what way(s) is OMW beautiful?






JD Nowell
OW: B7332
ES: AS400 V4R4 CO: DB2/400 SP: 11.2
Users: 250 TSE Users: 100
 
Discover how to build no-code data integrations and business process automations.

brother_of_karamazov

Legendary Poster
Currently, 16.

1. The logging is incredible. You *always* know down
to the smallest detail what is happening and happened.

2. The transfer activity rules, when combined with
proper security ensure that the CNC Admin is in
control of who can do what.

3. The CNC can pass off some really boring OMW project
advancement stuff to someone else, preferably a
development manager who should be doing it anyway.

4. Notification. You can set up notification so that
you (or someone else) knows exactly when an object is
checked out, checked in, transferred, etc.

5. Tokens eliminate the possibility of two people
having the same object checked out at the same time
and the problems associated with that.

6. Organization by projects is exactly what developers
have wanted to keep track of multiple.....projects!

I could go on and on. When I first saw OMW I thought
that it was just something else for the CNC admin to
have to handle. Now I would rather spend the time up
front setting it up (although out of the box it is
pretty tight) than doing object recovery.

Is that what you wanted or could I have just said "I
think it is really cool"? :)





--- hotm6654 <[email protected]> wrote:
http://198.144.193.139/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=0&Board=OW&Number=10004


__________________________________________________
 

bazscott

Member
Hi there, if you want to get at old Object Librarian you can put this in your ini file:

[OMW]
P9860_Object_Librarian=E

But, as I said before I wouldn't develop in it, OMW has many advantages and OL does not now tie in completely with all the object management tables.

cheers
Barry

Working at Miller Group, Edinburgh, Scotland
OneWorld Xe sp13 - Oracle - on Solaris and NT
 

altquark

Legendary Poster
heres my warning

don't screw around with OL in Xe.

We have 20+ developers working on our project, I believe that OMW is WAY more stable than OL ever was because I can trace back every little action a developer does - and then lock them out !

Please look at the whitepaper I wrote on my website for a "best practices" guide to OMW. Don't destroy your OneWorld environment just because you don't want to try out OMW.

Jon Steel
http://www.erpsourcing.com

ERP Sourcing
http://www.erpsourcing.com
[email protected]
 

hotm6654

Well Known Member
I have one company on XE w/ OMW (out of 4). I have no choice on OMW; I have
to have them use OMW even though they will NEVER EVER develop using JDE
tools. There is no throwing it out once your at XE. There is no moving
PM/OL/OT from B7332 to XE. It was foisted onto JDE customers by an
overzealous design team. It was written for shops that have 10+
"developers". Just look at document entitled "Survey of One World IS
Support" contributed by Tony St.Pierre. There are very few shops with 10+
developers working full-time on JDE code.

I would argue that if you have that much concern over managing your source
that you need it logged to this degree, then you have a development problem
and you need to fire the people that do not know what they are doing.
OL/PM/OT was sufficent for the typical shop. My impression is that the only
reason we have OMW is for JDE to cover their rear for bad ESUs.

No offense but I don't need to see your whitepaper. What I need (and I
think this was frequently stated at Focus) is for JDE to clean up their act
on ESUs.






JD Nowell
OW: B7332
ES: AS400 V4R4 CO: DB2/400 SP: 11.2
Users: 250 TSE Users: 100
 

scottw

Well Known Member
Jon, I know of a company how is on XE, they have developers on thin client
workstations. What is your opinion of this and why or why not is it a good
idea? Thanks

Scott B. Whipple
LDSI
Technical Consultant
5300 DTC Parkway Blvd. Suite 430
Englewood, CO. 8011
303-740-5500 Work
303-884-1405 Cell
 

jgersic64

Active Member
Amen to the ESU's..I asked many times, the technical sig, and during the
executive q&a about it. What was funny is that they kept talking about the
ESU's, and nothing about what they are actually going to do to MANAGE their
code. I was a bit disappointed, as they seemed to think it was just an issue
with the way they deploy changes, and not that they are releasing buggy
code. I never once heard any new control or procedure that would be
introduced to reduce the amount of bugs released...

John

Xe, SP14.2, NT/SQL
 

altquark

Legendary Poster
Re: RE: OMW is Cursed

Hi Scott

My view is that a developer should have a development workstation - and, if possible, be located as close to Central Objects as physically possible. However - I also understand that occassionally you need to be able to run development tools from a remote location - especially users creating new reports.

JDE keeps telling me that it is possible to now run RDA on the Citrix server. Thats a good thing. However - to run development (compiling BSFN's, FDA etc) remotely - you need to take control of a Development Workstation somehow.

Some users use PCAnywhere to do this. I really don't like PCAnywhere since it interacts a little TOO closely with Machine Operations. Its also too expensive in my opinion for just a remote control software. Instead, I (and many, many others) use VNC which is free. It is also extremely light - and a lot more secure. The VNC Viewer is also tiny (it fits on my PalmPilot) - and so can be run under a Citrix session to control a development workstation local to the citrix server. This is a very good way of running development remotely.

Jon Steel
http://www.erpsourcing.com

ERP Sourcing
http://www.erpsourcing.com
[email protected]
 
Top