Expand my Community achievements bar.

Don’t miss the AEM Skill Exchange in SF on Nov 14—hear from industry leaders, learn best practices, and enhance your AEM strategy with practical tips.
SOLVED

AEM 6.2 Lock Payload workflow step behaving as NoOp

Avatar

Level 2

I've got a custom workflow with a "Lock Payload Process" step but it doesn't seem to function as expected. I get the following in the logs:

com.day.cq.workflow.impl.process.LockProcess Locking is not currently enabled.  This is a No-Op

I've tried setting the "cq.workflow.config.allow.locking" property of the "Adobe Granite Workflow Configuration Service" but that doesn't seem to fix it... Moreover, I'm able to lock the page via Touch UI just fine so locking is working on the repository.

Thanks for your help!

1 Accepted Solution

Avatar

Correct answer by
Level 9

Hi Mick,

Not on granite but at  CQWorkflowService configure  cq.workflow.service.allow.locking

Thanks,

View solution in original post

15 Replies

Avatar

Correct answer by
Level 9

Hi Mick,

Not on granite but at  CQWorkflowService configure  cq.workflow.service.allow.locking

Thanks,

Avatar

Level 3

Hi ,

I have done the below steps as mentioned in the below URL after Upgrading from AEM 6.1 to AEM 6.3

and it's disabling the side-kick in classic UI..Is it a feature in AEM 6.3 or any other issue? Howe ever same thing working in Touch UI

Workflow lock/ unlock steps not working in AEM 6.3

1479464_pastedImage_1.png

Thanks,

Avatar

Community Advisor

Hope below will help:

  To apply configurations to allow the Lock/ Unlock processes to function in AEM 6.3, follow these steps:

  •   Go to http://host:port/system/console/configMgr.
  •   Find Day CQ Workflow Service.
  •   Mark Enable Lock/Unlock Process to true.
  •   Click Save.
  •   Find Adobe Granite Repository Service User Configuration, and add a new configuration.
  •   Set Simple Subject Population to true.
  •   Set Service Users to workflow-process-service.
  •   Click Save.


Arun Patidar

Avatar

Level 3

I have done the same steps after content-administrator not able to approve the workflow from side-kick and it's disabling the properties as mentioned in above screen shot in Classic UI

Avatar

Community Advisor

I tried same in AEM 6.3, I am able to complete workflow in both Touch and Classic UI.

The dialog will be disabled in classic UI only when user don't have rights to act to workflow.

Screen Shot 2018-05-04 at 3.50.25 PM.png



Arun Patidar

Avatar

Level 3

Thank for prompt reply,

I have provide the admin right and able to complete the same process as mentioned in my screen shot in Touch UI?

But the same thing disabling in classic UI why? Please find the below Touch UI screen shot where I am to complete the process for the same rights?

1479669_pastedImage_0.png

Thanks,

Avatar

Community Advisor

Are you able to complete workflow from Classic UI inbox?

http://localhost:4502/inbox



Arun Patidar

Avatar

Level 3

Yes, I am getting notification to inbox but why in classic UI i am not able complete through side-kick?

Avatar

Level 3

Also, I believe in the list of steps provided, should we not change the service users that is configured to lock and unlock the payload based on workflow model definition? Please see the highlighted section below - In my case, applying the below steps didn't work. I will try to change the service users to our custom user group/user and update the results.

In my case, This issue should be fixed for workflow packages.

Workflow lock/ unlock steps not working in AEM 6.3

  To apply configurations to allow the Lock/ Unlock processes to function in AEM 6.3, follow these steps:

  •   Go to http://host:port/system/console/configMgr.
  •   Find Day CQ Workflow Service.
  •   Mark Enable Lock/Unlock Process to true.
  •   Click Save.
  •   Find Adobe Granite Repository Service User Configuration, and add a new configuration.
  •   Set Simple Subject Population to true.
  •   Set Service Users to workflow-process-service.
  •   Click Save.

Avatar

Level 3

In my test, adding "workflow-user" seems to have solved the problem in first attempt of testing, will post if there are any further updates.

For those who are reading this understand that this user won't exist in 6.3 anymore if its a fresh install. But if if you do any in place upgrade let's say from 6.1 to 6.3, you will find this user in useradmin screen.

Avatar

Level 3

Hello,

I am using a custom workflow process step to lock and unlock the page. But when I lock the page with a specific user, I am unable to unlock it until unless I login as the admin. Is there anyway that I can use the custom step to lock it through the workflow and the initiator(the person who starts the workflow) must be able to unlock the page.

Regarding the unlock I am not able to do it at all. I am using the page.unlock() same as page.lock().

Can some one please help me out on this.

Avatar

Community Advisor

Hi,

Only lock acquiring user or admin can unlock the page.

I would suggest to unlock page using either in different workflow or same workflow using another process step. I used OOTB lock and unlock steps to achieve same.



Arun Patidar

Avatar

Level 3

@Arunpatidar thanks for the response. Here we have a specific use case where an initiator can  unlock the page manually. So we need to use custom workflow process step not the OOTB Lock and Unlock steps. While doing this if the initiator is trying to unlock the page it is saying to reach out to admin to get the page unlock. can we achieve the same functionality as Only lock acquiring user or admin can unlock the page??????? by using custom process step

I am using the different process step to unlock the page by using page.unlock() but this is not working where when used page.lock() is working fine. This is a custom process step.

Avatar

Level 3

Hello All,

I tried both OOTB workflow process and custom workflow process to Lock and Unlock the page. The page is getting locked and unlocked using service user but my requirement is this lock and unlock should be acquired by author/Initiator. Can someone help me out on this to achieve this functionality.