ServiceDesk 4.4.86 Update 11/14/10

That above-quoted and familiar phrase is from an 18th century poem by Robert Burns.  I'm not normally one to like poetry (actually, never), but when I was thinking about the subject of this entry the indicated phrase entered my mind as seeming apt.  The notion the phrase evokes, of course, is that, whether you're a mouse or man, you can lay very grand plans, and yet in spite of all determination and hope, they may nevertheless come to naught.   I'll get to that actual happenstance (as regards a couple of schemes within ServiceDesk) in a moment, but first, more about the poem. 

Probably like you, I had no idea where that "Best-Laid Plans" phrase came from, so I Googled it, and quickly arrived athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_a_Mouse.  It revealed the origin, and provides full text of the short poem (both original and translated into more modern English).  I read the modern translation, and, dang, I like it.  It's a really cool poem.  Check it out. 

Now, to the real topic. 

In the last few months, I've made some major improvements in the PartsProcess system's "To-the-Grave" elements of management.  Notably, in such regard:

1. In the archived view of the PartsProcess form (Ctrl-F8), I added the option to visually review items that do not show a complete and final disposition (whether it's use on the job, being returned to the vendor and credit received, etc.  Or, you can create an export containing the same information. 

2. In the current view of the PartsProcess form (F8), I added the option to create Core-Return daughter bands, and to visually review each item that contains any such band as may still be pending (i.e., core credit not yet received). 

Here is where my rodent-brain scheming went awry. 

It turns out that when you add a core-return daughter band to a parent PartsProcess request (pursuing Number 2, above), it prevents the parent from being moved to the archive -- until, of course, the core-return daughter in itself is complete and ready for such movement.  This is perfectly fine so far as managing the core is concerned, but throws a wrench into the works of reviewing received items to assure all reach a proper destination (Number 1 above).  At least, this is true if you use the new core-return function. 

The reason for this frustration is because (and until now) the review-non-fully-disposed-of-items function has been designed to look solely at items in the PartsProcess archive.  This formerly made perfect sense, because items received and appropriately priced are automatically moved to the archive, and there they are ready for the indicated type of review.  The problem is that the added/new core-return strategy prevents applicable items from being so moved -- for the duration of the time it takes to get the core returned and credit received.  In the meantime, there may be unused and un-returned items that are not showing up in the very review where you want to see them. 

Hopefully, you can now see how these two schemes collided.  We can thank Paul and David Manning at Sharper Electronics for bringing the matter to light (they ploughed up my nest, so to speak). 

So, what is the fix?

In a nutshell, the review-non-fully-disposed-of-items function (Number 1 above) will now look in both archived and current PartsProcess locations.     

For the export/report option, making the report function additionally look in the current PartsProcess file is a simple, behind-the-scenes change (you'll simply see more stuff, if applicable, in the resulting report). 

For the on-screen review mode, it's more complex.  The archived view of the PartsProcess form is designed solely to show archived records, and vice versa in regard to the current view of the form -- yet, you need to see results (for the review we're concerned with here) from both sources at once.  In theory, we could make a hybridized machinery that would simultaneously show records from both and within a single form view (plus allow editing, etc.), but the mechanisms would be very difficult from a programming perspective.  Also, the result might be confusing to the user. 

Instead, we've added an option.  When, from the archived view of the PartsProcess form you pick the display category "items Received but not disposed of," you'll now have a checkbox option labeled "Include items from current file." 

If you proceed with that option checked, the ServiceDesk interface will maximize to use the entirety of your screen.  This is to make room for both archived and current views of the PartsProcess form to simultaneously display (and without one covering the other), each in a mode to show you items-not-fully-disposed-of.  Thus, you can truly see (and work upon) the entire set of such items at once. 

Take that, you unforgiving universe.  Perhaps we should now consider a new title for this section: maybe "Rodent Brain Strikes Back!"