remoterepository connector methods Itemname parameter, fixed

Ok, this looks like a configuration problem. not quite documented.

IF in your Sync rule configuration, you put values in the internal and external 'type qualifier' fields, then these values will be passed to the connector.

these are defined as dropdown fields in the Sync Rule editor UI,
which implies they get their values from somewhere..

while possibly true, you CAN still just TYPE into the fields as well.
(thus creating a list!)..

Sam

Please note: CQ Synchronizer development is flat out working on getting
the RTC-3.0 release ready, and so will not be able to participate in
forum discussions until that eases up. So please do keep posting what
you discover to the forum, since there are a variety of teams using and
extending the Item Synchronizer framework which would be interested in
your experiences ... just wanted to explain why development isn't
currently participating in this thread.

Cheers,
Geoff

On 10/13/2010 6:07 PM, sdetweil wrote:

remoterepository connector methods Itemname parameter always null
string..

this is defined as 'String'.. is it supposed to be something
different?

the canCreateObj(String ItemName) method is pretty useless without
knowledge of the object type.

Sam

thanks Geoff..

I haven't been paying attention to the R3 schedule.
can u give me any estimate of the time before they have bandwidth? week, month?

so I can plan my time is all.

I keep trying things, and will continue to post my experiences, learnings as I find them.

I just have to be careful, as I overcommitted a demo date which I won't be able to keep based on the current problems.

Sam

Hi Sam,

There's a good chance the developers will be tied up until GA
(currently, targeting November ... jazz.net has the current schedule).
Once they complete their development tasks, developers pitch in with
system-testing, documentation review, and all the various other tasks
required to get a major release out the door. They do still try to
monitor the forums, and fire off quick answers when they can ... but
they are unlikely to have time until after release GA to work on
questions that involve some research/experimenting (like yours :-).

But it looks like a couple of folks are already starting to work in that
area, so hopefully the community can provide some mutual support until
the developers are available again.

Cheers,
Geoff

On 10/15/2010 11:23 AM, sdetweil wrote:

thanks Geoff..

I haven't been paying attention to the R3 schedule.
can u give me any estimate of the time before they have bandwidth?
week, month?

so I can plan my time is all.

I keep trying things, and will continue to post my experiences,
learnings as I find them.

I just have to be careful, as I overcommitted a demo date which I
won't be able to keep based on the current problems.

Sam

thank you for the feedback, and I do understand

sam