It's all about the answers!

Ask a question
QuestionsTagsUsersBadges
Guidelines | FAQ
Follow this question
Question details

×42,877

question asked: Dec 12 '11, 3:33 a.m.
question was seen: 4,675 times
last updated: Dec 12 '11, 3:33 a.m.

Related questions

Renaming literal values for existng fields

0
Michael Walker (992●15●201●157) | asked Dec 12 '11, 3:33 a.m.
I read about one user who renamed the literal values to match the label value as a way to workaround the issue where the literal value appears in query outputs.


I tested this with existing fields and had to create new values for the fields, then do a mass update to migrate work items from the old value to the new.

It appears to have worked fine but I'm curious if there's anything negative to doing this that I'm not seeing yet?

One answer

Most liked answers ↑|Newest answers|Oldest answers

0
permanent link
Ralph Schoon (63.5k●3●36●46) | answered Dec 13 '11, 3:57 a.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
Hi Michael,

I have seen that approach a few times. I don't think there are issues with it. Best would be to start with the changes done to the template in the beginning.

One effect I was thinking of is that there is a gap in the data warehouse data when you change the enumeration literal ID's. But the data warehouse probably rather stores the value and not the ID.

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.