2012-12-06 Release

Identify release date

see Release Calendar

minutes

Schedule cloning

clone from prd to: pre, trn, and tst for after release; https://hi.service-now.com/

minutes

Schedule code review

this should happen after initial handover and before release

minutes

Submit change request

Open a build/test change request in https://yale.service-now.com/, assign to INF SN App Support

minutes

Start release document

Copy from template ServiceNow Release YYYY-MM-DD

minutes

Requirements freeze

Curate, then freeze requirements, providing estimates for each using estimator spreadsheet or equivalent

hours

Build phase work

Begin work in dev

days

Unit tests

Ensure all pushed to tst & unit tested

hours

Initial code freeze

Hand over initial requirements list for functional & QA validation in tst

minutes

Conduct code review

Shouldn't take long, just basic validation of approach and docs

hours

Defect fixes

Iterative follow-up work in dev, test for defect resolution

days

Finalize release

Identify changes & updates that are going/not going. Push to pre.

hours

Final code freeze

Hand over final requirements list for functional & QA validation, w/ regression, in pre

minutes

Go/no-go

Decide to push to production.

minutes

Production deployment

Push to prd.

hours

Production rollback

If applicable; follow ServiceNow Rollback Procedure.

hours

Notify stakeholders

send out email w/ summary status & link to release documentation, close out RFC and cancel clone requests, if rollback or no-go.

minutes

Target/Actuals

Deliver target/actuals using estimator spreadsheet or equivalent

hours

Defect 343

FRU Deferred, sent to ServiceNow (INT2108892)

Hi,
After resolving an incident, users are returned to a blank screen.
Steps to reproduce:
1) navigate directly to an incident via its URL (e.g. from an email, or copy and paste a URL into the browser address bar)
2) set status to resolved, fill out any required fields, and click "Save and Exit" right below the resolve notes
3) you will be redirected to a (nearly) blank central pane.
If there is no previous context, we'd like this to return to the user's home page.

Defect 366

fix in test - FRU

Report created for Active Problems shows closed Problems. See attached screenshot. Reported by Neha. This seems to be part of a larger issue where closed tickets showing up in 'open ticket' queues and views.

Defect 397

fix in test

Since the October 11, 2012 release the On Hold status in the Incident module is not working properly. Before the upgrade if you changed the Incident state to 'On Hold' the Additional Comments field would be required. If you then changed the Incident State to 'In Progress' the requirement to add something to the Additional Comments field would go away. Currently the requirement does not go away and even if you change the status to In Progress you're required to provide the comments. Steps to replicate: Change any open Incident state to 'On Hold' See that the Additional Comments field is now required. Change the Incident state to 'In Progress' See that the Additional Comments field is still required. The requirement for this field should disappear if the Incident state is not 'On Hold'. Please note that the functionality that was released in the October 11, 2012 release should still hold true and that the Additional Comments should only be required when the Incident State is put on hold for the first time

Defect 399

fix in test

In the 'State' drop down in the CTS Work Request Request form the option should read 'Work in Progress' instead of 'In Progress' to match the SCTASK state of 'Work in Progress'.

Defect 401

fix in test - items which write back to requested_for are limited to one item per request (i.e. no cart)

The CTS Work Request Form the client and contact are not mapping correctly to the requested by/for. Check out RITM0021413. The client/contact are both Rick Kremer (see the fields in the form) however the Requested For is Luis Ribeiro, the person who opened the form. The requested for should be the client. The contact should be the person who receives the email notifications however I am unsure of the exact mapping of the contact to the request fields. See attached screenshot.

Defect 402

fix in test

CTS Work Request form not carrying over the assignee of the ticket from the form to the SCTASK. See attachments. Notice how on the RITM there is an assignee but in the SCTASK there is no assignee.

Defect 404

fix in test - FRU0013155

The additional comments field is no longer available on the SCTASK form. It shows the header but there is no box to type the comments. See screenshot.

Defect 405

fix in test

On the CTS Work Request form the assigment unit is not being populated. The assignee is being populated with the person logged into the system however the assignment unit is not being filled in with the person's default assignment unit.

Defect 407

fix in test

Remove 'On Hold' from the CTS Work Request Form Status drop down. This is not an approved Request status and should be removed from this form as it is causing confusion.

Requirement 718

fix in test

in the resulting SC task, populate short description and description from the Requested Help Item variable

Requirement 721

fix in test

Knowledge - add (mandatory) Intro field to Knowledge form.

Requirement 726

fix in test

Knowledge - change field display names: Short Description -> Title, Description -> Keywords, Text -> Body