[sims] System Manager 7

[Jamman960]

Found out yesterday I've got a place at the April session

[Sivadam]

Maybe they have kept me separate from you other Edugeekers on purpose to prevent any fights breaking out .........

[GREED]

Maybe they have kept me separate from you other Edugeekers on purpose to prevent any fights breaking out .........

 

Probably safe! Don't want blood on Bedford streets

[Sivadam]

Attended the first UAT re System7 yesterday. It's looking good so far.

 

At last I will be able to manually remove those Ex-Contacts who have been lying around in SysMan6 as DB Users following Unprovisioning for SLG. This has prevented me (and all others!) from deleting them via the 'Delete Unlinked Contacts' routine and so I (we!) won't need a patch from Capita, in the future, to do this!

 

System7 looks pretty good but we did find a few issues and requested a number of enhancements (especially me - as is my wont at UAT! )

Edited March 30, 2011 by Sivadam

[GREED]

Right... so does it address the fact that giving a permission to something breaks somethign else?

 

More importantly, are the permissions named like what they turn on and off?

[vikpaw]

Right... so does it address the fact that giving a permission to something breaks somethign else?

 

More importantly, are the permissions named like what they turn on and off?

 

LOL if only it was that simple.

[number34]

I'm not quite sure what GREED means by giving a permission breaks something else but it is much easier to view and change the permissions for a group. And they are introducing the concept of Capita providing a 'template' group, eg Class Teachers, which can then be cloned and permissions altered. It is then saved as a custom group.

I was on the testing yesterday as well and came away quite pleased with what I had seen in System Manager 7 and also relieved that we don't use SLG here as the problems with parent users and contacts seems to be a major one.

[Sivadam]

SysMan6 used to cause issues in the past but it has been pretty stable for the past couple of years. It just would not do everything that it ought to do.

The issue of Parent/Contact DB Users has been around since SLG was released (and maybe even with its predecessor).

System7 is able to resolve these issues!

[vikpaw]

@34 - cloning groups has always been possible, unless they are making it easier. You've always been able to make your own group, then add a pre-defined role, and remove the bits you don't want, or add them as the case may be...

[number34]

Vik, the idea of classifying the Capita supplied groups as a template group is to stop the problem whereby users, having modified one of the existing groups, had any changes they had made overwritten by a SIMS upgrade. All cloned groups will become custom groups so will not be affected when the the upgrade updates the template groups. I should have made this clearer in the original post.

[GREED]

Yes, mostly what Sivadam said is what I meant, but it is good to know that has settled down recently.

 

Oh and Mike, I notice we are getting festive again!?

 

[EDIT: Before I get a negative rep, I am asking the question, not encouraging arguments as was previously noted when I asked! :/]

[Sivadam]

Festive? Maybe others didn't think so ..............

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm! One wonders where all that posting went ............. And why ............ ?

[vikpaw]

Vik, the idea of classifying the Capita supplied groups as a template group is to stop the problem whereby users, having modified one of the existing groups, had any changes they had made overwritten by a SIMS upgrade. All cloned groups will become custom groups so will not be affected when the the upgrade updates the template groups. I should have made this clearer in the original post.

 

It was clear, what i'm saying is that it has always been possible, that is nothing new. If you clone a group, it is a clone and therefore unaffected by any SIMS upgrade. Making a new group and adding e.g. the class teacher role, will protect it from upgrades, and can then be tweaked. Essentially all default groups have always been templates, that you can make custom groups from. I'm not sure i see any difference / advantage here. Unless what you are saying is that the default groups are now protected, and cannot be tweaked. This i can see would stop people removing / adding a permission only to find it reverted back after an upgrade.

[vikpaw]

@34 - i notice somebody on SupportNet state that for a cloned group, based on a template group, that when there is a system upgrade makes a change to the template group, this change will propogate to the cloned group. At least that is what i understood. Is it that, perhaps, that you were referring to?

 

I still don't think it's a great feature, as the idea of cloned/custom groups is that you want to control the permissions, not find that something is added automatically. Plus where those permissions are dependent, it could cause a problem. I have had occasions when a permission has been added such as access to homepage panels, and they wouldn't work until i manually added them, however i was happy with that, as it meant i was aware of the change, and could choose to apply it or not.

 

I'd prefer a bit more clarity in the permissions, and the linking, and perhaps some detailed notes on any changes that occur during updates.

 

If anyone can clarify further that would be helpful..

[splattthecat]

@34 - i notice somebody on SupportNet state that for a cloned group, based on a template group, that when there is a system upgrade makes a change to the template group, this change will propogate to the cloned group. At least that is what i understood. Is it that, perhaps, that you were referring to?

 

I still don't think it's a great feature, as the idea of cloned/custom groups is that you want to control the permissions, not find that something is added automatically. Plus where those permissions are dependent, it could cause a problem. I have had occasions when a permission has been added such as access to homepage panels, and they wouldn't work until i manually added them, however i was happy with that, as it meant i was aware of the change, and could choose to apply it or not.

 

I'd prefer a bit more clarity in the permissions, and the linking, and perhaps some detailed notes on any changes that occur during updates.

 

If anyone can clarify further that would be helpful..

 

The issue we have had with custom groups not being upgraded is that when new functionality is included that depends on new or changed access rights for a group, this will often result in users getting errors in SIMS until the custom groups are manually changed with the new permissions, and Capita don't tell you what the permission changes that are needed are!

 

Until Capita support custom groups my feeling is they should be withdrawn completely (Of course it would be much better if Capita did support them) I'm sure this will get raised at the second UAT session tomorrow which I am attending.

[PhilNeal]

Please raise the issue at the session tomorrow. Custom groups should be supported (i.e. they shouldn't go wrong) although we can't help with groups that you have created and tell you why they aren't working. Crashes are a completely different matter.

[vikpaw]

Exactly my point splatthecat, so please do raise it. That's why i would like some more detailed notes on changes that are made, as i can't see that a blanket upgrade to a template and thus it's child clones is helpful. Especially if it's going to add / take away functions, it could completely overwrite the purpose of the cloned group.

 

There's debate going on in SupportNet at the moment about access to Next of Kin details, and it's very troublesome.

 

I think anyone that uses custom groups should just be told that it's at their own risk. I'm happy to manipulate as required. I doubt very much the changes will block much that is already working, it's more likely just going to restrict access to some new functionality.

[vikpaw]

Please raise the issue at the session tomorrow. Custom groups should be supported (i.e. they shouldn't go wrong) although we can't help with groups that you have created and tell you why they aren't working. Crashes are a completely different matter.

 

One example Phil, is as i said, when homepage panels were introduced it was a basic permission for all. As i don't use any built-in groups, this was not available to my staff until i added it. However it was fine, and luckily obvious during testing.

 

Some permissions issues are complex, such as the need to have permission to view Next of Kin details for staff, in order to view their timetables, even though it doesn't show the NoK in the timetable! This is an old example, so it most likely fixed now, but you get the idea. Things like that can cause an unknown error / crash which can be unexplainable.

 

It would be good to have a change matrix for the permission structure at each upgrade. Not just the perms spreadsheet, much more granular. That way, anyone wishing to take advantage can see simply what has been added (or removed) and where. Then we'd be able to troubleshoot our own issues. At the moment i think the blanket answer is that we can't be helped as it's too complex, and this is right, especially considering how long it takes on the current sysman to just load the full list of permissions (couple of minutes for me.)

[matt40k]

I'm sure this will get raised at the second UAT session tomorrow which I am attending.

 

See you tomorrow

[Sivadam]

Good Luck you guys. I am sure you will enjoy it!

Don't forget to ask for the retention of the Backup routine - for us Sysmen that may wanna produce a backup for SupportNet and UAT without having to rely on the Tekkies having to use Solus! Yep! I raised it last week!

[matt40k]

Don't forget to ask for the retention of the Backup routine - for us Sysmen that may wanna produce a backup for SupportNet and UAT without having to rely on the Tekkies having to use Solus! Yep! I raised it last week!

 

No, no, no.

 

Sysman7 is permissions, provisioning of users (for SIMS) - Data Manager. SOLUS3 is backups etc - Network Manager. The network manager is responsible for the data security, so they won't want anyone walking off with an entire copy of the database without them knowing, nor will they want to worry about "SIMMS" permissions as they are too busy make sure the staff laptops are encrypted.

 

Nearest I would go is to have patch to enable the routine to do a backup within SIMS (be it Sysman7 or whatever)

 

PS: Two red blocks? What happened to the green?

[GeeHubb]

PS: Two red blocks? What happened to the green?

 

I reckon Sivadam's downloaded a patch from Solus to turn those green squares red....

[Sivadam]

No, no, no.

 

Sysman7 is permissions, provisioning of users (for SIMS) - Data Manager. SOLUS3 is backups etc - Network Manager. The network manager is responsible for the data security, so they won't want anyone walking off with an entire copy of the database without them knowing, nor will they want to worry about "SIMMS" permissions as they are too busy make sure the staff laptops are encrypted.

 

Nearest I would go is to have patch to enable the routine to do a backup within SIMS (be it Sysman7 or whatever)

 

PS: Two red blocks? What happened to the green?

That ain't the situation here Matt! I am Sysman - it is pointless having to go to my Technical colleague just to get a backup to send up to SupportNet. I log the vast majority of cases and the Sysman Backup only leaves the site in an encrypted, passworded format via FTP Upload to Capita. I often want these at pretty short notice and I want them at 7.00am so I can start the upload before the network and internet get busy, else it literally takes all day to upload the data! And my colleague has many more technical issue to attend to without having to run a mere Sysman backup, which is all that is needed for the upload!

 

As for the Red Squares - one of the Admins said something about me that I did not agree with. You know me! I could not let such comments go unanswered. The trouble was he kept responding and so I had to as well! When will they learn? The thread was cleared after I went home from school one evening and the comments were gone the next time I logged in from home! I am continually being told to report those that cause offence to me. I reckon I might start doing just that! It might even be even more entertaining than my current methods. They would get swamped! It would certainly give them something to think about! Have you noticed how much help I have given over my past 100 posts or so and still I go double red. Just for stating the truth!

 

One hopes that this post does not prompt others to respond inappropriately (and that is subjective anyway!) else I might have to start reporting folk, be they users, Members, Mods, Admins or whoever else that offends me! This post is a straight response to you as you asked a direct question and so I would hope that nobody else takes offence at what is in this thread! Suffice it to say that if I do change my methods I will be honest enough to state publicly that I have reported that person and the reason I have done so!

Edited April 4, 2011 by Sivadam

[matt40k]

So do you encrypt it then upload it? In your case you ideally want a "Upload data to Capita" button in Sysman7

 

Problem with Backups being in Sysman7 is that then any one could do a backup who has Sysman access, but that doesn't normally mean they can physical access the backups to tidy them - and not everyone using TidyBackups

[Sivadam]

Yep Matt. That is sort of what I am asking for!

 

Normal backups - ICT Services Manager (Network Manager)

 

Backup for UAT and Supportnet would be additional for Sysman using System7. Much like it is now actually! I don't do the main backups but I do need access as and when! Only three of us have Sysman Access - myself and two Technical colleagues! And I am often the one that usually tidies the Sysman Backups anyway!

 

Mind you - I have been doing all this many years before we had a Technical Team with the current knowledge that we have now! Originally there was just me and one other using SIMS and she was the Finance Manager! And over the years I have run many, many more upgrades, backups etc etc than anybody else here!

Edited April 4, 2011 by Sivadam