It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

DNG6.0.5:Updating Workflow status by using OSLC RM v2 does not work.


masato kumakura (13) | asked Jan 12 '18, 3:35 a.m.
edited Jan 12 '18, 3:36 a.m.

 I try update workflow status using  standard approach from below link.



But when I submitted "PUT" , workflow value is  disappeared.
Is that operation needs a kind of special method?


========
Steps to reproduce
0. add Workflow attribute to an artifact type

1. create an artifact with the artifact type modified in step 0.

2. Update the artifact which is created in step 1. by using OSLC RM v2

(Example)


(HTTP Header)
If-Match=<value from e-tag>
OSLC-Core-Version=2.0
Accept=application/rdf+xml

 
(Contents)
<rdf:RDF
...
...
......
.....
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

(Actual Result)

Rest Response returns 200.

However,
Status of workflow goes blank when showing this artifacts by Web browser.

"j.0:DefaultWorkflow" is disappears when getting the artifact information by OSLC RM v2 Rest.

(Expected Result)
Workflow Status is updated with specified parameter. e.g. com.ibm.rdm.workflow.common.complete


Comments
Donald Nong commented Jan 12 '18, 4:20 a.m.

Someone asked a similar question some time ago but I cannot find it now. My experiments show that you can "remove" the workflow status by using PUT, but I have not found a way to set the value yet.


Bas Bekker commented Jan 12 '18, 1:31 p.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER

Think this is a known defect, let me try to find it.


Donald Nong commented Jan 16 '18, 6:25 p.m.

The other post that I mentioned earlier is the below one, just for cross-reference purpose.
https://jazz.net/forum/questions/248330/rdng-v604-v605-changing-the-state-of-an-artifact-type-requirements-through-oslc-or-java-apis

3 answers



permanent link
Bas Bekker (1.4k4) | answered Jan 12 '18, 1:32 p.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER

Looks like you ran into a known issue, which will be resolved in DNG 6.0.6.
Link to the defect: An OSLC PUT operation removes workflow information from the requirement (120221)


Comments
Gerardo Guardado Lopez commented Jan 17 '18, 12:50 p.m.

 yes, that's a defect being solve in 6.0.6.


permanent link
masato kumakura (13) | answered Jan 24 '18, 4:27 a.m.

 Thanks a lot  for your answer!


permanent link
Eric Walden (11) | answered Sep 12 '18, 6:25 p.m.

 This defect is still present in 6.0.6. Observing exactly the same behavior as OP.

Your answer


Register or to post your answer.


Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.