Nec pulmenti vobis! Scelerisque vitae est elit Nazi products of NLB?

Hodie, I tried to access a document library via windows explorer. This doc lib is living inside a system that consists of two WFE’s load balanced by some kind of Cisco NLB solution. (Si / cum retiacula pythones indica mihi quid sit, Ego hoc update stipes).

Windows explorer couldn’t connect. I did some research and eventually, retiacula magos dixisse WebDAV est infirma / non sustinetur / beneath the dignity of the NLB.

Ita, assuming the network wizards aren’t just telling me the network wizard equivalent of "take a long walk off a short bridge", Ego autem mirari — facit NLB, natura, disable WebDAV? Do we lose our windows file explorer interface to SharePoint? Is Cisco the IUS Nazi?

Curo MUSCUS / WSS environments — custodiens cum Microsoft scriptor notitia basis

Microsoft creates knowledge base articles day in and day out and some of those are darned important to know about if you live in the SharePoint world.

Ego ad velocitatem aequare cum eis via per obsequium praebeant ad bonum folks www.kbalertz.com. KBAlertz enables you to sign up for your favorite MS technology and they send you digest versions of Microsoft KB articles via email.

Policy Web Application, Situs securitatem et tuitionem qr — Scire configuration

(Updated 11/29 Qualiter ad obvius occasus per telam application consilium UI)

I had one of those "why is MOSS doing this to me????" moments today. In finem, BENE mea culpa.

We have an enterprise MOSS project going on and we want to secure "place holder" sites so that no user may access it or see it. That’s easy:

  1. Vade ad site.
  2. Confrínget securitatem hereditátem.
  3. Aufero sulum user / coetus a site permissiones.

Supremus administrator collection site licentia relinquere iustum ad ad situm videre.

Si quis alius ligna in, ut non sit satis videre, et eatenus ab omni loco solitis locis.

Sed … non fuit. Simul, I suddenly realize that my "Joe User" standard user test account with no priv’s other than restricted read access has a "Site Actions" choice everywhere he goes. I double check one thing and double check something else. I pick up the phone to call a colleague, but put it down and check something else. I go for a walk and try everything all over again. I call a colleague and leave a message. And then, tandem, Invenio apud Ethan scriptor blog, his opening graph makes it quite simple:

MUSCUS 2007 Web Application vocatur novus pluma habet Politiae. Hi sunt permissiones quod securitatem Web Application purum alligatur. Hi omni securitate occasus, ut securitatem occasus dominari in situ positus est congeries sive Site (Meaning) quod pro gradu user.

A quick visit to web application policies shows that "NT Authority\authenticated users" had been granted Full Read. I removed them from the list and everything finally started working as expected. I believe they were added in the first place by someone with the mistaken impression that that is best method to grant read access to everyone in the enterprise. It does, sed, eliquare a quote, "It does not mean what you think it means."

Access web application policies this way:

  1. Perge ad Centralis Administration
  2. Lego Application Management
  3. Select "Policy for Web Application"
  4. Quod in screen, make sure you pick the correct web application. Enim me, Fusce a ipsum id elit consectetuer arcu ille qui non vult.

Cum hanc quaestionem, Lorem Ipsum verbis, vel in posterum minime mirum quantum in hac iuvatur:

Visibilium omnium actiones users Site

Actiones users ad omnes aspectabili Site

site securitatem actiones non sunt ornaverunt

impetrarunt MUSCUS site

introductio securitatem musco

Technorati Tags:

Vivos et Simplex: Uti certa Keyword Quaero Praecessi Core in Quaerere

Quick and Simple Instructions:

Edit a page and add a Search Core Results web part.

Edit that web part and expand "Fixed Keyword Query".

Add the fixed keyword query (e.g. ContentType:"Training invoice" TrainingInvoiceNumber:1111)

Expand Results Query Options and change "Cross-Web Part query ID" to a value other than "User Query" (e.g. "Query 2").

Notes:

Using core search results in this manner allowed me to create a page that shows information from another site collection. The client has two major site collections: Departments and Products.

The product site collection contains, naturally enough, product information. Each product in the site collection aggregates data from multiple sources.

One of the departments, codes and testing, is on such source. When users access product XYZ, they should see codes and testing data directly on the XYZ main page. Since codes and testing is hosted in another site collection, it’s a little awkward. We decided to use the core search results web part since search spans site collections. Codes and Testing manages product data via a custom list that is constrained by a specific content type. Aa keyword query that uses first the content type and then the product number narrow down the search to a single row in the custom list.

The keyword query above is an AND. It returns documents of content type "Training Invoice" and where the invoice number equals "1111".

A nice benefit from this approach: We can edit the XSL from the core search results web part and generate any format that we want.

En (http://devcow.com/blogs/jdattis/archive/2007/04/17/SharePoint_2007_How_to_Rollup_Content_from_multiple_Site_Collections.aspx) for another blogger’s discussion on this topic.

</finem>Scribet ad mea blog.

Dico me de tua blog!

If you maintain a blog that is at least minimally connected to SharePoint, please let me know in comments. I would love to add you to my blog list.

If you maintain a blog that is not connected to SharePoint but want me to add it anyway, let me know. I’ll may create a separate blog list.

Please give:

  • Your blog URL (Manifestum)
  • A short description of your blog.

I want to keep the link to "active" blogs, which I’m roughly defining as one post per week and minimum three months old. If you don’t meet that "requirement" add your name to comments anyway. It’s *my* list so I can break my own rule if I want to.

Gratias!

Operarius Lorem ipsum et materia Template — Cimice decrementum in in Template

The client noticed a bug today with the above mentioned template.

Course managers create courses. When creating a course, in maximum numerus of procurator quod specificat sedes praesto.

The template provides for self-service enrollment. I enroll and a workflow attached to the registration list decrements the "available seats" sociatur Utique.

Individuals may also unregister from a course. The bug lies here. Unregistering from a course does not increment the available seats counter. Ut ex, available seats is not accurate. This bug is compounded by the fact that when available seats decrements to zero, non plus sui ministerium adnotatione admittitur.

Fortunate, Microsoft provides the workflow for this process. Even better, suus sea workflow creatus per SharePoint Designer.

Haec altum gradu sequantur vestigia figere eam:

  1. Ignis sursum SDP.
  2. Obvius fundatur off site disciplina template.
  3. Access "Attendee unregistration" workflow.
  4. Insert his gradibus (Duo gradus, quorum primus ego):
    1. Adice Cursus:Repleti sedes minus 1 (Output INCERTUS:calc)
    2. (igitur) Item in update Cursus

Click Perago et es fieri.

Collaborative offa:


SharePoint amet:

imaginem

Complevit workflow:

imaginem

Descende-conputat EXERCITATIO:

imaginem

Item cursuum in update:

imaginem

Da bono nuntio crebro; da malum fama mane

I’ve been a consultant for a lot of years now and as any experienced consultant knows, good communication is one of the key pillars to the successful delivery of a project. It’s so obvious, it’s really almost boring to talk about. This isn’t a post about generic communication. Pro, I’m writing about the darker side of communication — communicating bad news.

It goes without saying that giving good news to the client is done all the time, as often as possible. Who doesn’t want to give good news? Who doesn’t like to hear good news?

On the flip side, bad news is no fun at all. I have always struggled with this. In the earlier days of my career, I would know something was awry with a project and instead of telling the client, I would work longer hours to try and solve the problem. I would enjoin my team to work harder. It’s a natural enough impulse to think that a super-human effort can save the day. Some times this works, some times it does not. Even when it "works" it’s often a mixed bag. Is the quality of the deliverable really up to spec when key parts have been developed over several 60 ad 80 hour weeks?

What is the best way to handle bad news? The answer is: tell it early. Don’t wait until one week before the project budget will be consumed. If you know six weeks out that there simply isn’t enough time to deliver some bit of promised functionality, tell the client right then and there. The client may get upset (probably will), there may be incriminations and accusations and hurt feelings. Sed, when emotions cool off, there’s still six weeks left on the project. Six weeks is a good chunk of time. There’s time to adjust plans, change schedules, get the ball rolling on budget extensions (good luck!) and just generally come to grips with the "facts on the ground" and devise a new plan that still results in a successful project.

Case in point: I’m working on a project characterized by:

  • T&E budget with a capped "Not to exceed" dollar amount.
  • A "best efforts will be made" promise to deliver X, Y and Z by project’s end.
  • Lack of promised key resources on the client side. These resources were not withheld on purpose, nor for any "bad" reason, but they were withheld.
  • A dawning realization as the project passed the half-way point that we were not going to be able to deliver "Z" (mainly because the promised resources were not actually available).
  • Regular status reports and "CYA" documentation that backed us (the consulting team) up.
  • Tightly knit implementation team with members drawn from the consulting organization (my company) and the client.
  • Distant management team, in both a metaphorical and physical sense. The management team was focused on another large enterprise project and due to space constraints, the implementation team was housed in a separate building on campus, down a hill and relatively far way from "civilization".

With roughly six weeks left on the project budget, nos (the implementation team) knew that we were trouble. The contract said that we needed to deliver "Z". Even though the project is time & materials and even though we only promised "best efforts" to deliver Z and even though we had great justification for missing the delivery … the bottom line is that it wasn’t looking good — we were not going to deliver Z in a shape a quality that would make anyone proud.

Recognizing this, we went to management and told them that the project budget would be consumed by a certain date and that we were in trouble with Z.

A mini firestorm erupted over the next few days.

Day 1: Management team calls in its staff for a special meeting (nos, the consultants are not invited). Contracts are printed and handed out to everyone and a line-by-line review ensues. Management puts the staff members on the defensive. I don’t think the phrase "Stockholm Syndrome" is *actually* used, sed vos adepto picture. We’re a tight-knit group, post omnes, and the staff has been working with us consultants day in and out for several months now.

Day 2: Management calls another staff meeting. They feel a little better. They want options and ideas for moving forward. They realize there’s still six weeks remaining in the current project budget, which is still a decent bit of time. One of the action items: schedule a meeting with full implementation team (including consultants).

Day 5: Full team meets, constructive meeting ensues and a new achievable plan put into place. Even better, we’ve already begun discussing phase two and the client invites us to prepare proposals for that phase immediately.

If we had waited until just three weeks remained, or even worse, one or two weeks, it would have been much different. Instead of a constructive meeting to re-align the project, we would have been pulling out status reports, parsing the contract and reviewing old emails to justify this or that decision. We would have "won" but is it really "winning" hoc in casu?

Ita, if you have to give bad news, give it early. Bad news given late isn’t just bad, suus horrendum.

Usura “Personae aut coetus” in columna iniri

People commonly ask about using a column of data type "Person or Group" in another column of data type "Calculated".

Imo linea, hoc non operetur in WSS 3.0 (vel MUSCUS).

Cum addita ratione agmen, WSS shows the list of fields it allows you to use for the calculation. If you type in the name of a column that is not in its list, Is dico vos:

Unus vel plures columns References non liceat, quia non est modus columnae datis sustineantur definitur formulae.

Workaround: Use an event handler. The event handler fires when the user saves the item. It performs the update you would have wanted the calculated column to do for you.

Suspendisse in ratione communi in agris:

Lorem vivos: Et illa vera et accurata, sed vidi tantum passim ingeniis musco / WSS ut non mirum sit amet (Sin ATTONITUS) if someone has figured out a way to do this without resorting to code. If you’ve figured out clever work-around or know someone that did, placet me cognoscere!

MUSCUS / michi WSS: “Alius paginam iam author in modificatur …” sed ultro, non fuit.

We did some heavy duty re-organizing of our site taxonomy via "Manage Content and Structure". For reasons unknown to me, hoc processus (quamquam in summa operantes) broke some navigation links in the quick launch. The broken links are characterized by:

  • Wrong URL. Verbigratia, it should be "/sites/departments/HumanResources/…". Autem, the new link is "/sites/Corporate/HumanResources/…".
  • Repetitur frenos in titulo quaestionis filum, ut in:

/sites / Dicasteria / HumanResources / _layouts / viewlsts.aspx?BaseType = 0?BaseType = 0?BaseType = 0?BaseType = 0

That’s easy enough to fix via site settings/navigation. Except, MUSCUS sistit hic me experior me et faciam illud:

imaginem

Hoc est,, Nemo ulla mutatione (declinavimus a me, utique).

A vivos quaerere irrepserit hac forums Discussion MSDN: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1691577&SiteID=1

Willelmi Belle Heurdier posuerit eam in penultima (tamquam 10/02/07) stipes:

Hoc est,:

Corrupta ad reset headings, habes :

– omnem tabularum sub capite corrupto

– aufero caput capitis corrumpi

– A occasus album, add a removed list to the quick launch (Haec non corrumpuntur petenti regenerare)

Vos igitur ad bonum….


Peritus Sharepoint – Cap Sogeti Gemini Helvetia

Confusus sum, quia ego, volens transire amet consectetuer navigatio, make the change and then get hit with the "page was modified" message. Tandem, I realized I had to go to the list settings and remove/add it to quick launch. That did the trick. Happy times are here again!

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog!

Problems “Donec Date pause” operatio in-creatum SPD workflows

UPDATE 12/10/07: Hotfix as described in MSDN KB929816 solved the problem for us mentioned below. Obtain the hotfix and then install on each server on the farm. Igitur, sharepoint configuration utility on each server. Here is the MS Support link for that KB: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932816.

Background:

An environmental engineering amet habemus negotium ubi necessitas requirit ut 30 some-odd manufacturing locations located throughout the United States needs to ensure that those plants file for their various state-mandated permits in a timely fashion. One approach we’ve investigated leverages the "Pause Until Date" activity available to us via SharePoint Designer worfklow. The engineering manager (vel eius vicarii) enters all the required permits and reminder dates at the start of the year. The system then does all the heavy lifting.

Environment:

MUSCUS, 64 frenum, Rectum Apparatus environment (progressionem buxum), 2 servientibus (In SQL servo #1, omnia alia server #2).

Problemata:

The Pause Until Date action seems like the perfect solution and it may well prove itself to be. Autem, Quisque a quam non faciat (pro nobis).

  1. Job non workflow est scheduled ad currere, ever. I discovered this by reading through CHRISTOPHORVS Albus scriptor (http://chrissyblanco.blogspot.com/2007/06/issues-with-delay-activity-in-moss.html) excellent write-up by using stsadm thusly:

    C:\>stsadm -o getproperty -propertyname "job-workflow" -url http://localhost

    <Property Exist="No" />

    C:\>

    Quod mirum erat, sed facile solvitur per:

    C:\>stsadm -o setproperty -propertyname "job-worfklow" -propertyvalue "every 1 inter minutes 0 et LIX" -url http://localhost

    Operatio feliciter expletum.

    C:\>

    Quod faciendum, the first "In Progress" workflow celeriter officium fecit et concitus.

  2. Miserabile, the next one didn’t work as expected. Gratanter, Christopher refers us hic (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932816). As of writing of this entry, IT department sumus expectantes obtinere hotfix, but it does look promising. Our copies of the affected .dll’s do not share the same byte size, ita spero satisfaciet proposito.

Workaround:

Re-running the stsadm -o setproperty command seemed to prod the workflow timer awake. It would, Violatis 7 minutes laxus, actually wake up and continue along with the workflow.

Quæstiones / Alloquitur exitibus:

Donec mora Date non operatur.

Date mora Donec non recuperabit.

Workflow status does not change from "In Progress"

Workflow status stays "In Progress"