Jazz Forum Welcome to the Jazz Community Forum Connect and collaborate with IBM Engineering experts and users

PUT on Test Case fails with "Edit Section Header" permission error

I  am experiencing inconsistent behavior when updating Test Cases through  com.ibm.rqm.integration.service.IIntegrationService .

The process is straightforward: I perform a GET on a Test Case, modify only the workflow state ( ns6:state ), and then PUT the XML back to the same resource URL. No elements are added, removed, or intentionally modified other than the workflow state value.

The expected result is that the Test Case is updated successfully and the server returns HTTP 200 OK. Instead, some Test Cases fail with HTTP 403 Forbidden, reporting that the user does not have permission to Edit Section Header.

What makes this confusing is that the exact same integration pattern works in other project areas and even for some Test Cases within the same project area. The user account already has the permissions required to save and edit Test Cases, and no section headers are being intentionally changed as part of the update.

After comparing working and failing Test Cases, I noticed that the failing artifacts contain section elements where the extensionDisplayName attribute is stored as a resolved literal string rather than an RQM translation key. Since the Integration Service performs a full-resource replacement on a PUT request, it appears possible that these literal values are being interpreted as an attempt to modify the section header, causing the server to enforce the Edit Section Header permission check.

Has anyone encountered this behavior before? Is this a known GET/PUT round-trip issue with extensionDisplayName values? If so, is the recommended approach to remove extensionDisplayName attributes (or section elements entirely) from the payload before issuing the PUT, or should the user also be granted the Edit Section Header permission to allow the update?

Workaround (not fully fixed):

I removed the section.headers (pre/post conditions and test case design) completely from the body and it works now. 

But again it is not fully working if I want to modify the test case design it will not work. 

0 votes


Be the first one to answer this question!

Register or log in 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.

Search context
Follow this question

By Email: 

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here.

By RSS:

Answers
Answers and Comments
Question details
× 11,106

Question asked: Aug 24, 7:57 a.m.

Question was seen: 235 times

Last updated: Aug 24, 8:54 a.m.

Confirmation Cancel Confirm