Author Topic: Updated by  (Read 2826 times)

Zvolensky

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Do... or do not. There is no try.
    • View Profile
Updated by
« on: July 14, 2016, 04:44:52 am »
Hello
Is there a way to find out who updated and object? I can see author, date created and date last updated. I would like to know who performed the last update.
How can i get to this information?

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9216
  • Karma: +140/-133
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2016, 08:00:43 am »
You need to turn on the audit: Project/Auditing

q.

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 6044
  • Karma: +73/-83
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2016, 09:53:13 am »
You need to turn on the audit: Project/Auditing

q.
That's a heavyweight solution to the problem.

I often think that it would be useful to have an option where the author field is updated with the last modifier.  In an enterprise situation, who last touched an item is more informative than the original author who has since moved on and long disappeared.  If you really wanted to retain the original author, you could copy it to a tagged value.

Thoughts?
Should I pop in a feature request?

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9216
  • Karma: +140/-133
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2016, 05:38:45 pm »
A more lightweight could be the use if triggers. I guess when it comes to certain requirements each tool needs individual tuning. Some nice general approach would be fine, but I do not except anything in that direction from the Ribbon-factory.

q.

Graham_Moir

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 689
  • Karma: +5/-7
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2016, 07:45:11 pm »
You need to turn on the audit: Project/Auditing

q.
That's a heavyweight solution to the problem.

I often think that it would be useful to have an option where the author field is updated with the last modifier.  In an enterprise situation, who last touched an item is more informative than the original author who has since moved on and long disappeared.  If you really wanted to retain the original author, you could copy it to a tagged value.

Thoughts?
Should I pop in a feature request?

Paolo

Agreed Paolo.  I would like a lightweight way to retain the original author as well as the the last author/editor.

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 6044
  • Karma: +73/-83
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #5 on: July 15, 2016, 09:38:45 am »
OK,  feature request submitted.

IF (note capitals) I get an ID number, I'll publish it here so that you can support it.

Paolo
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 09:43:27 am by Paolo F Cantoni »
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Glassboy

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 954
  • Karma: +52/-65
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #6 on: July 15, 2016, 11:07:30 am »
I'd rather each element had an audit tab with the full history of changes to the element than any of the options being called "light weight".  To me they're all a cottage industry approach that are the territory of an add-in not something that should be in the core product.

Zvolensky

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Do... or do not. There is no try.
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #7 on: July 15, 2016, 01:55:20 pm »
Hello
Thank you all for response and thx Paolo for raising the feature request

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 6044
  • Karma: +73/-83
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2016, 04:57:46 pm »
I'd rather each element had an audit tab with the full history of changes to the element than any of the options being called "light weight".  To me they're all a cottage industry approach that are the territory of an add-in not something that should be in the core product.
Sure if you want full audit presumably on every element (and I would argue every connector etc...).

However I think we need the notion of controlled elements - which have full audit, and lighter weight solutions for those items that aren't yet (or currently) in a fit state to worry about it.

When I enquired about auditing, I was told it would significantly slow down the operation of the repository.  This is an overhead we can't afford.  We have other means of tracking down changes if there is an issue ( and they come free as part of our out of hours processing.

Since Sparx isn't providing the metadata for a lightweight solution which is what we're after at present, there's nothing much we can do.

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 6044
  • Karma: +73/-83
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #9 on: July 15, 2016, 05:01:01 pm »
Hello
Thank you all for response and thx Paolo for raising the feature request
It turns out Sparx don't issue IDs for Feature request.  However, they have informed me that if users email Sparx Support with the Subject: "Registered Support Request - Last updated by (Author)" they will treat it as an additional request for the same feature.

I think it would be good to indicate here that you've submitted the additional requests.  That way, we users can judge support for the feature.

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Graham_Moir

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 689
  • Karma: +5/-7
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2016, 09:34:48 pm »

Formal request submitted referencing this thread.

skiwi

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1727
  • Karma: +23/-49
    • View Profile
Re: Updated by
« Reply #11 on: July 29, 2016, 02:07:29 pm »
+ 1  --  done
Orthogonality rules
Using EA12.1 (1229) on Windows 10 Enterprise/64 bit. Repositories in SQLServer2014 R2 & Access2003/JET4.0