Deadline task problems

[kc]

Hi all,



I have a few questions on the Deadline task settings.



I have seen the option for omitting the deadline route from the task submit options, but I am unsure what effect this option has?



I have checked the option in Workbench and thought that it would remove this route from WOrkspace (remove the deadline route button), but this is not the case as I still see the button in Workspace.



Can you elaborate on the use of this option?



Also I have a problem with the "follow route" option. Even though I have not checked this option my process continues to the next step.



Is this the intended behaviour?



Last - but not least, I would like to know if it is possible to just change the task instructions when a deadline has occurred and let the user open the form and fill it out and click the appropriate button to continue the process? What happens now is that my process takes a route (if one exist) out of the deadlined step no matter what I do and I can not open the deadlined task it is just there in Workspace and I can only click the "remove deadlined" task button.



Please don't hesitate to ask questions if you don't understand what I mean 🙂



Thanks in advance



Sincerely

Kim

[Jasmin_Charbonn]

"Is this the intended behaviour? "



Yes. The intent is that you don't see this button in workspace since it should only follow that route when it deadlines. I just did a test in my environment and it works as expected.



As for you second item, this is exactly what reminders are for. They won't submit the item, just warn the user that they need to do somethign to the item. You can also change the instruction.



Jasmin

[kc]

Hi again Jasmin,



I am not sure I understand your answer correctly.



What happens to me is the following:



I click "omit deadline route from task submit options", but still see the button in Workspace, I guess this should not be like that?



What I actually need in my process is the possibility to taking a route out of the task, not showing the notification (or autocompleting it) and let the next task be shown to the user.



Can this be done?



Thanks in advance



Sincerely

Kim

[Aditya_S_]

I am trying to make Workspace as a repository for all the forms used in the workflow.



I inserted an "Assign task" and set the deadline to 1 min. This way the form will hit workspace for a minute, auto complete it and move to the next step in the process.



However, when the process reaches the deadline a timer icon appears on the left with button "Remove the deadline task".



Is there a way to make the process to automatically go to the next task once the deadline is reached ?



Aditya

[yodadobe]

Attach an event to the assign task. Throw that event in parallel to the assign to user step using a gateway. Add process ID as event data and on the filter so the events don't cross processes.



Actually, one of the samples is pretty much what I just described. It just is a timer rather than an assign to user.

[Jasmin_Charbonn]

If you select the "Follow a specific route on deadline" option in the Deadline section of the user step, it'll move the item to the next step.



No need to use event. Now you might still get something in your workspace, but this isn't the item you sent to the next step. It's just notification.



Jasmin

[yodadobe]

I am using those same options in one of my processes and they work as I would expect and as Jasmin described.



The event method is if someone does not want the deadlined task item to remain in the queue. I just used that technique in another process.



I had an issue where user A was out of office and delegated to user B. A process was sent out where A and B were assigned as task at the same time in a gateway. So B got 2 tasks. B had never logged into the system. From what I gather, both threads triggered a record to be created for user B. The second one got a unique constraint violation. The system is new and most of the users have not yet logged in. I did not want this error to occur again. I created a process that in parallel assigned a task to every user (180) then immediately threw the event and yanked it out of their queue. Every user now has an entry in the user tables so no worries about future race conditions.

[Jasmin_Charbonn]

Sorry, I'm a bit confused.



"The event method is if someone does not want the deadlined task item to remain in the queue"

The deadline task doesn't have to stay in the queue if you set it to follow a specific route.



"A process was sent out where A and B were assigned as task at the same time in a gateway"

You can't assign a task two users at the same time. There is always one owner for a particular task. In the Gateway, if you have two users in parallel, then you have two tasks.



"So B got 2 tasks"

I don't understand the use case.



Let me know.



Jasmin

[yodadobe]

It does not leave the task itself, it leaves the red clock icon. In my case, I did not want the red clock. I believe that was one of the things the other's were looking at as well.



User B got his task and user A's task since B was the out of office delegate for A. The problem is not that he got 2 tasks, he should have. The problem is that the behind the scenes steps that the server performs when a user who has never logged in is assigned a task, failed. There were 2 instances running at the same time of a task to add user B. The user can log into the system because he is in an LDAP group, but no LiveCycle specific record exists until either logging in for the first time or is assigned a task. I have no question on this. I already ran this one time only process to trigger all the users in the LDAP group to be stored in the table (...WORKFLOW_USERS I think off the top of my head). I was showing an example where I wanted a task assigned to a user, but pulled from their inbox without leaving the red clock behind.

[HowardTreisman]

The red clock is added so that the person who missed their deadline KNOWS that they missed their deadline.

If you don't want the red-clock to show up, we could probably write a custom component to get rid of it.

If you want to discuss further, please email info-at-avoka.com.

Howard

http://www.avoka.com

[HowardTreisman]

Hi

I had a bit more of a think about this.

Actually, you can do this right now with components that we already have.

First, you'd need to set up a custom escalation process, rather than using the built-in escalations provided by User>assignTask.

This is described here:

http://avoka.dnsalias.com/confluence/display/Public/Customize+User+Task+Escalation+After+Assignment

Then, instead of deadlining the task, just get the custom escalation process to complete the task, using ProcessUtils>Force Task Completion Force Routing.

Docs here: http://avoka.dnsalias.com/confluence/display/Public/Process+Utils+DSC

Download here: http://www.avoka.com/avoka/escomponents.shtml

Howard