Uploaded image for project: 'WORKTERRA'
  1. WORKTERRA
  2. WT-12271

NH effective date rules on plan design is overriding the additional eligibility

    Details

    • Type: Enhancement
    • Status: In Development
    • Priority: Medium
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: BenAdmin
    • Environment:
      Stage
    • Module:
      BenAdmin - EDS
    • Reported by:
      Implementation
    • Company:
      All Clients/Multiple Clients
    • Item State:
      Development - In Analysis
    • Sprint:
      WT Sprint 41
    • Severity:
      Simple

      Description

      When the New Hire rule is setup on the plan design, in the Eligibility tab, to be effective 6 months from DOH this rules overrides the Additional Eligibility rule (AND IS new hire = to NO) this means when the new hire rule is setup on the plan the NH ends up seeing the plan in the NH enrollment tunnel. They should not be able to see the plan if they are a NH.

      Speaking with Amit Thorve it was advised that the "The eligibility should always take a precedence. If eligibility fails then plans should not be available for employee."

      Please review and provide feedback on when this bug can be corrected.

      CC:Gary Cunninghampeggy fiedlerRobyn AdkisonYamilka CocaAmit Thorve

        Attachments

        1. BioRad_AdditionalCriteria.jpg
          247 kB
          Priya Dhamande
        2. FW 1211 Sprint - Development Approval.msg
          51 kB
          Gaurav Sodani
        3. WT-12271_Test Scenarios_StageStatus.xls
          14 kB
          Priya Dhamande
        4. WT-12271_Test Scenarios_Status.xls
          14 kB
          Priya Dhamande
        5. WT-12271_Test Scenarios.xls
          14 kB
          Meghana Joshi
        6. WT-12271_Test Scenarios (408756e2-2a5e-47cd-bfff-9dc4aa1ad2bf).xls
          24 kB
          Priya Dhamande

          Issue Links

            Activity

            amjohnson Amannda Johnson created issue -
            jaideep.vinchurkar Jaideep Vinchurkar (Inactive) made changes -
            Field Original Value New Value
            Assignee Satya [ ID10004 ] Jyoti Mayne [ jyoti.mayne ]
            prasad.patil Prasad Patil (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Jyoti Mayne [ jyoti.mayne ] Prasad Patil [ prasad.patil ]
            prasad.patil Prasad Patil (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Prasad Patil [ prasad.patil ] Jyoti Mayne [ jyoti.mayne ]
            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne made changes -
            Assignee Jyoti Mayne [ jyoti.mayne ] Rohit Shete [ rohit.shete ]
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Status Open [ 1 ] In Development [ 10007 ]
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Dev Estimates 15
            Developer Rohit Shete [ rohit.shete ]
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Analysis(10204)
            Hide
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Swapnil Pandhare,

            As discussed, the issue reported in WT-12271 occurred due to code fix for WT-10797.

            Please look into this.

            Thanks and Regard,
            Rohit Shete

            CC : Samir, Satya, Amruta Lohiya, Jyoti Mayne, Umesh Kadam

            Show
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Swapnil Pandhare , As discussed, the issue reported in WT-12271 occurred due to code fix for WT-10797 . Please look into this. Thanks and Regard, Rohit Shete CC : Samir , Satya , Amruta Lohiya , Jyoti Mayne , Umesh Kadam
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Rohit Shete [ rohit.shete ] Swapnil Pandhare [ swapnil.pandhare ]
            Developer Rohit Shete [ rohit.shete ]
            Module Parent values: BenAdmin(10100) Parent values: BenAdmin(10100)Level 1 values: EDS(10108)
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Analysis(10204)
            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne logged work - 22/Nov/17 02:57 PM
            • Time Spent:
              0.25h
               

              discussion

            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 15h [ 54000 ]
            Original Estimate 15h [ 54000 ]
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) logged work - 22/Nov/17 02:58 PM
            • Time Spent:
              7.5h
               
              • Analysis
              • discussion with prasad
              • discussion with jyoti
              • discussion with umesh
              • discussion with swapnil
              • code debug
              • issue reproduce
              • check code check in
              • comment added
              • mail send
              • Store procedure debug
            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 15h [ 54000 ] 14.75h [ 53100 ]
            Time Spent 0.25h [ 900 ]
            Worklog Id 92152 [ 92152 ]
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 14.75h [ 53100 ] 7.25h [ 26100 ]
            Time Spent 0.25h [ 900 ] 7.75h [ 27900 ]
            Worklog Id 92156 [ 92156 ]
            prasad.patil Prasad Patil (Inactive) logged work - 22/Nov/17 05:04 PM
            • Time Spent:
              1.5h
               

              Analysis and discussion with Rohit

            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Swapnil Pandhare [ swapnil.pandhare ] Niteen Surwase [ niteen.surwase ]
            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 7.25h [ 26100 ] 6h 55m [ 24900 ]
            Time Spent 7.75h [ 27900 ] 8h 5m [ 29100 ]
            Worklog Id 92393 [ 92393 ]
            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Rohit Shete

            We have made changes in SP. I've executed it on Rohit_Stage_BioRad. Please verify it and let us know whether it is working or not. SP sent you through email.

            Thanks,
            Niteen S.

            Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Amruta Lohiya

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Rohit Shete We have made changes in SP. I've executed it on Rohit_Stage_BioRad. Please verify it and let us know whether it is working or not. SP sent you through email. Thanks, Niteen S. Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Amruta Lohiya
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Niteen Surwase [ niteen.surwase ] Rohit Shete [ rohit.shete ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 23/Nov/17 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              6h
               

              Analysis and Discussion with Swapnil and Rohit
              Checking New Hire Script Changes and Testing

            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) logged work - 24/Nov/17 01:25 AM
            • Time Spent:
              20m
               

              Discussion with Niteen

            Hide
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Niteen Surwase,

            We have tested related scenarios for this issue and those are working well. Please verify at your end and update.

            Thanks and Regard,
            Rohit Shete

            CC : Satya, Amruta Lohiya, Swapnil Pandhare, Jyoti Mayne, Umesh Kadam

            Show
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Niteen Surwase , We have tested related scenarios for this issue and those are working well. Please verify at your end and update. Thanks and Regard, Rohit Shete CC : Satya , Amruta Lohiya , Swapnil Pandhare , Jyoti Mayne , Umesh Kadam
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Rohit Shete [ rohit.shete ] Niteen Surwase [ niteen.surwase ]
            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Swapnil Pandhare

            Changes has been done (Reverted from NF-2698) and tested on trunk. It is working as earlier was.
            Changes are ready for LB.

            Thanks,
            Cc; Satya Sheetal Bodhale Rohit Shete Gaurav Sodani

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Swapnil Pandhare Changes has been done (Reverted from NF-2698 ) and tested on trunk. It is working as earlier was. Changes are ready for LB. Thanks, Cc; Satya Sheetal Bodhale Rohit Shete Gaurav Sodani
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) logged work - 24/Nov/17 03:24 PM
            • Time Spent:
              2.5h
               
              • Discussion with umesh
              • discussion with nitish
              • Unit Test
              • scenario analysis
              • Comment add
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 24/Nov/17 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              6.15h
               

              Analysis, DB Script
              Unit Testing
              Discussion with Rohit

            prasad.patil Prasad Patil (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 6h 55m [ 24900 ] 5h 25m [ 19500 ]
            Time Spent 8h 5m [ 29100 ] 9h 35m [ 34500 ]
            Worklog Id 92838 [ 92838 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 5h 25m [ 19500 ] 0h [ 0 ]
            Time Spent 9h 35m [ 34500 ] 15h 44m [ 56640 ]
            Worklog Id 93109 [ 93109 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 15h 44m [ 56640 ] 21h 44m [ 78240 ]
            Worklog Id 93112 [ 93112 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: On Hold(10207)
            rohit.shete Rohit Shete (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 21h 44m [ 78240 ] 24h 14m [ 87240 ]
            Worklog Id 93666 [ 93666 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Labels Employee_workflow
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: On Hold(10207) Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Progress(10206)
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Approval status Need approval for stage [ 18454 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Status In Development [ 10007 ] Local Testing [ 10200 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Progress(10206) Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: Ready for Stage(10213)
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Stage Due Date 2/Dec/17 [ 2017-12-02 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: Ready for Stage(10213) Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: On Hold(10211)
            Hide
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi All,

            Keeping the ticket on hold, as it has not been approved for stage deployment

            Regards
            Gaurav

            Show
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment - Hi All, Keeping the ticket on hold, as it has not been approved for stage deployment Regards Gaurav
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Stage Due Date 2/Dec/17 [ 2017-12-02 ]
            rakeshr Rakesh Roy (Inactive) made changes -
            Status Local Testing [ 10200 ] Reopen in Local [ 10018 ]
            rakeshr Rakesh Roy (Inactive) made changes -
            Status Reopen in Local [ 10018 ] In Development [ 10007 ]
            rakeshr Rakesh Roy (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: On Hold(10211) Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: Ready for Local Testing(10209)
            Hide
            rakeshr Rakesh Roy (Inactive) added a comment - - edited

            Niteen Surwase As discussed with you, this is ready for local testing.Not deployed on LB.
            Gaurav SodaniSwapnil Pandhare

            Show
            rakeshr Rakesh Roy (Inactive) added a comment - - edited Niteen Surwase As discussed with you, this is ready for local testing.Not deployed on LB. Gaurav Sodani Swapnil Pandhare
            Hide
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment -

            Please provide ETA on when this will be ready to test in stage and production.

            Show
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment - Please provide ETA on when this will be ready to test in stage and production.
            rakeshr Rakesh Roy (Inactive) made changes -
            QA Rashmita Dudhe [ rashmita.dudhe ]
            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Amannda Johnson

            It will be taken in Sprint 41 and it is planned on Stage by 23rd Dec.

            Thanks,
            Niteen S.

            Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Gaurav Sodani Satya

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Amannda Johnson It will be taken in Sprint 41 and it is planned on Stage by 23rd Dec . Thanks, Niteen S. Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Gaurav Sodani Satya
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: Ready for Local Testing(10209) Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: On Hold(10207)
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Sprint WT Sprint 41 - Bugs [ 95 ]
            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) made changes -
            Dev Due Date 14/Dec/2017
            hrishikesh.deshpande Hrishikesh Deshpande (Inactive) made changes -
            QA Rashmita Dudhe [ rashmita.dudhe ] Meghana Joshi [ meghana.kulkarni ]
            QA Estimates 8
            Hide
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi All,

            Attaching the development approval email for your reference

            Regards
            Gaurav

            Show
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment - Hi All, Attaching the development approval email for your reference Regards Gaurav
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Approval status Need approval for stage [ 18454 ] Approved for development [ 18453 ]
            Development Approval Yes [ 18474 ]
            jyotibala Jyotibala Pardeshi (Inactive) logged work - 11/Dec/17 11:33 AM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              3h
               

              Unit testing.
              Discussion with Swapnil and Sheetal.

            jyotibala Jyotibala Pardeshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 24h 14m [ 87240 ] 26h 14m [ 94440 ]
            Worklog Id 95597 [ 95597 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Stage Due Date 22/Dec/17 [ 2017-12-22 ]
            Hide
            Yamilka.Coca Yamilka Coca (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hello - Does this item still need to be deployed to prod, after the 12/23 deployment to stage? Thank you.

            Show
            Yamilka.Coca Yamilka Coca (Inactive) added a comment - Hello - Does this item still need to be deployed to prod, after the 12/23 deployment to stage? Thank you.
            jyotibala Jyotibala Pardeshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 26h 14m [ 94440 ] 27h 14m [ 98040 ]
            Worklog Id 95597 [ 95597 ]
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            jaideep.vinchurkar Jaideep Vinchurkar (Inactive) made changes -
            Root Cause Bug [ 18430 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: On Hold(10207) Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Progress(10206)
            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - - edited

            Hi Swapnil Pandhare

            As this change is Ready for LB.
            I've done with unit testing for this change to make sure that it is working as earlier.
            Is New Hire macro is worked fine on Plan Design at below levels:

            • SA/P/B Login at EE level - Done
            • Company Admin Login at EE level - Done
            • EE Login - Done

            Thanks,
            Niteen S.

            Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Satya Gaurav Sodani

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - - edited Hi Swapnil Pandhare As this change is Ready for LB. I've done with unit testing for this change to make sure that it is working as earlier. Is New Hire macro is worked fine on Plan Design at below levels: SA/P/B Login at EE level - Done Company Admin Login at EE level - Done EE Login - Done Thanks, Niteen S. Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Satya Gaurav Sodani
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Progress(10206) Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: Ready for Local Testing(10209)
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 13/Dec/17 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              5.5h
               

              Full length Unit Testing Thorugh SA/P/B/CA/EE Logins and workflows

            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) logged work - 14/Dec/17 10:32 AM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              5h
               

              Analysis
              Test Scenarios writing

            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 27h 14m [ 98040 ] 32h 14m [ 116040 ]
            Worklog Id 96129 [ 96129 ]
            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Worklog Id 96129 [ 96129 ]
            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Attachment WT-12271_Test Scenarios.xls [ 70106 ]
            khandu.kshirsagar Khandu Kshirsagar (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: Ready for Local Testing(10209) Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: LB Deployed(11600)
            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) logged work - 15/Dec/17 09:45 AM
            • Time Spent:
              3h
               

              Testing on LB

            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 32h 14m [ 116040 ] 35h 14m [ 126840 ]
            Worklog Id 96312 [ 96312 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 35h 14m [ 126840 ] 40h 44m [ 146640 ]
            Worklog Id 96394 [ 96394 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Niteen Surwase [ niteen.surwase ] Meghana Joshi [ meghana.kulkarni ]
            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment -

            [~meghana joshi], This has been deployed on LB.

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - [~meghana joshi] , This has been deployed on LB.
            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Meghana Joshi [ meghana.kulkarni ] Hrishikesh Deshpande [ hrishikesh.deshpande ]
            meghana.joshi Meghana Joshi (Inactive) made changes -
            QA Meghana Joshi [ meghana.kulkarni ] Hrishikesh Deshpande [ hrishikesh.deshpande ]
            mahendra.mungase Mahendra Mungase (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Hrishikesh Deshpande [ hrishikesh.deshpande ] Mahendra Mungase [ mahendra.mungase ]
            hrishikesh.deshpande Hrishikesh Deshpande (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Mahendra Mungase [ mahendra.mungase ] Priya Dhamande [ priya.dhamande ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: LB Deployed(11600) Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: In Testing(10210)
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Status In Development [ 10007 ] Local Testing [ 10200 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Link This issue is cloned by WT-12816 [ WT-12816 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Attachment WT-12271_Test Scenarios_Status.xls [ 70371 ]
            Hide
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment -

            Environment: LB
            Company: For QA FDU for hspl
            Login: Partner, Employee and Company Admin

            The bug is tested for attached test scenarios. Status for the test cases is atatched with jira.

            All the cases worked as expected for mentioned logins. So, moving this jira on Stage.

            Hrishikesh Deshpande Sachin Hingole

            Show
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment - Environment: LB Company: For QA FDU for hspl Login: Partner, Employee and Company Admin The bug is tested for attached test scenarios. Status for the test cases is atatched with jira. All the cases worked as expected for mentioned logins. So, moving this jira on Stage. Hrishikesh Deshpande Sachin Hingole
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: In Testing(10210) Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: Ready for Stage(10213)
            khandu.kshirsagar Khandu Kshirsagar (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: LB QA(10201)Level 1 values: Ready for Stage(10213) Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: Stage Deployed(11602)
            Hide
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi All,

            This ticket has been approved for stage deployment on 12/21/17.

            Regards
            Gaurav

            Show
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment - Hi All, This ticket has been approved for stage deployment on 12/21/17. Regards Gaurav
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Deployment Approval Approved for stage deployment [ 18455 ]
            Production Due Date 29/Dec/2017
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: Stage Deployed(11602) Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: In Testing(10214)
            hrishikesh.deshpande Hrishikesh Deshpande (Inactive) made changes -
            Status Local Testing [ 10200 ] Stage Testing [ 10201 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: In Testing(10214) Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: Ready for Production(10217)
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Hide
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment -

            Environment: Stage
            Company: FDU for hspl
            Login: Partner, Employee and Company Admin

            The enhancement is tested for attached scenarios. All scenarios worked as expected. Status for the same is updated and attached with jira.

            As scenarios worked as expected, moving jira on Production.

            Hrishikesh Deshpande Sachin Hingole

            Show
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment - Environment: Stage Company: FDU for hspl Login: Partner, Employee and Company Admin The enhancement is tested for attached scenarios. All scenarios worked as expected. Status for the same is updated and attached with jira. As scenarios worked as expected, moving jira on Production. Hrishikesh Deshpande Sachin Hingole
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 27/Dec/17 08:11 AM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              4h
               

              Stage Testing

            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 40h 44m [ 146640 ] 43h 44m [ 157440 ]
            Worklog Id 98007 [ 98007 ]
            Hide
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment -

            When will this be released onto stage? I just tested, on BioRad stage site, and my first test failed. I added a new hire and e-trade benefit type showed in the New Hire enrollment tunnel. Since they are a New Hire they should not see the e-trade plans at all. The new hire I added is employee "EsppNH Test" with a date of hire of 12/10/2017.

            Show
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment - When will this be released onto stage? I just tested, on BioRad stage site, and my first test failed. I added a new hire and e-trade benefit type showed in the New Hire enrollment tunnel. Since they are a New Hire they should not see the e-trade plans at all. The new hire I added is employee "EsppNH Test" with a date of hire of 12/10/2017.
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Attachment BioRad_AdditionalCriteria.jpg [ 70902 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: Ready for Production(10217) Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: Re-open(10216)
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Resolution Unresolved [ 10200 ]
            Status Stage Testing [ 10201 ] Reopen in Stage [ 10023 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Priya Dhamande [ priya.dhamande ] Niteen Surwase [ niteen.surwase ]
            Hide
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment -

            Amannda Johnson,

            The test cases are covered without considering the New Hire Effective Date Rule.
            We need to fix this issue considering the New Hire Effective Date Rule. So, reopening the jira for the same.

            Niteen Surwase Satya Hrishikesh Deshpande

            Show
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment - Amannda Johnson , The test cases are covered without considering the New Hire Effective Date Rule. We need to fix this issue considering the New Hire Effective Date Rule. So, reopening the jira for the same. Niteen Surwase Satya Hrishikesh Deshpande
            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 43h 44m [ 157440 ] 44.15h [ 158940 ]
            Worklog Id 98299 [ 98299 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 28/Dec/17 01:17 PM
            • Time Spent:
              3h
               
              • Issue Repro
              • Meeting
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 28/Dec/17 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              2.5h
               

              Analysis and Debugging for this ticket
              Discussion with Satya and Gaurav

            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) logged work - 28/Dec/17 11:56 PM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              0.5h
               

              Discussion with Gaurav and Satya and niteen

            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Status Reopen in Stage [ 10023 ] In Development [ 10007 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Stage QA(10202)Level 1 values: Re-open(10216) Parent values: Development(10200)
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Item State Parent values: Development(10200) Parent values: Development(10200)Level 1 values: In Analysis(10204)
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) made changes -
            Comments Hi All,

            Following point has been approved for production deployment on 12/29

            Regards
            Gaurav
            Deployment Approval Approved for stage deployment [ 18455 ] Approved for production deployment [ 18457 ]
            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 44.15h [ 158940 ] 73h 44m [ 265440 ]
            Worklog Id 98299 [ 98299 ]
            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 0h [ 0 ] 29.5h [ 106200 ]
            Time Spent 73h 44m [ 265440 ] 44h 14m [ 159240 ]
            Worklog Id 98299 [ 98299 ]
            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 29.5h [ 106200 ] 28h [ 100800 ]
            Time Spent 44h 14m [ 159240 ] 45h 44m [ 164640 ]
            Worklog Id 98819 [ 98819 ]
            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - - edited

            Hi Amannda Johnson

            Please find below detailed analysis of different scenarios and system behavior:

            Scenario I:

            1. Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No AND
            2. NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period of 6 Months from Date of Hire

            Then plan Effective date will be calculated considering 6 months waiting period.
            As per system behavior, Then that Effective Date will be considered for additional criteria (i.e in our case Is New Hire).
            For that effective date if employee is not New Hire then, it satisfies above 1st criteria and shows plan for employee.

            Current Example-

            Plan Customization on company BioRad :
            1. Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No AND
            2. NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period 6 Months from Date of Hire.

            Employee Hire Date of mentioned Employee (EsppNH Test) : 12/10/2017

            Plan's Effective Date will be 6 Months from Date of Hire = 06/10/2018
            Then system will check Is New Hire criteria at the Effective Date of 06/10/2018 AND for this effective date, employee is not New Hire.
            So, It is satisfying 1st criteria and plan will be visible to employee.

            Scenario II:

            Only Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No
            AND NH Effective Date rules not set.
            Then, plan will be visible accordingly to Employee New hire.

            Example-
            1. Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No
            Employee Hire Date : 12/20/2017

            Plan's Effective Date = 12/20/2017
            As per system behavior, At the Effective Date of 12/20/2017 employee will be New Hire.
            So, as per 1st criteria in plan customization, plan will not be visible to employee.

            Note: As per system behavior, first priority is always given to plan Dating Eligibility Rule.

            Observation:

            If we are setting additional criteria as Is New Hire = No AND also setting NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period on plan design, then both the conditions are contradicting to each other by checking New Hire and adding Waiting Period to NH Effective Date.

            If we don't want to show plan in New Hire, use either additional criteria as Is New Hire = No OR NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period on plan design.
            1. If we set criteria Is New Hire = No, then It'll not show plan in New Hire mode, it'll only visible after New Hire.
            OR
            2. If we set NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period, then It'll show plan exactly after waiting period time.

            QA Comments:
            We have tried to achieve result with below customization on Hspl copy.

            1. Created Split Plans for New Hire and Existing Employee
            2. Created two Eligibility rules for existing and new Hire employees
            3. For New Hire Employee Plan customization:

            Additional criteria:
            Is New Hire Yes
            And Employer. Two Year Indicator not equal to Y

            Dating Eligibility Rule:
            New Hire Effective Date Rule
            Use Waiting period > XX months from Date of Hire > 6
            Now with this customization, New Hire Employee will not get the Plan in tunnel.

            4. For Existing Employee Plan
            Additional criteria:
            Is New Hire No
            And with this customization, existing employee will get plan as per mode available.

            Thanks,
            Niteen S.

            CC: Swapnil Pandhare Satya Gaurav Sodani Sheetal Bodhale Umesh Kadam Priya Dhamande

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - - edited Hi Amannda Johnson Please find below detailed analysis of different scenarios and system behavior: Scenario I: 1. Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No AND 2. NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period of 6 Months from Date of Hire Then plan Effective date will be calculated considering 6 months waiting period. As per system behavior, Then that Effective Date will be considered for additional criteria (i.e in our case Is New Hire). For that effective date if employee is not New Hire then, it satisfies above 1st criteria and shows plan for employee. Current Example- Plan Customization on company BioRad : 1. Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No AND 2. NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period 6 Months from Date of Hire. Employee Hire Date of mentioned Employee (EsppNH Test) : 12/10/2017 Plan's Effective Date will be 6 Months from Date of Hire = 06/10/2018 Then system will check Is New Hire criteria at the Effective Date of 06/10/2018 AND for this effective date, employee is not New Hire. So, It is satisfying 1st criteria and plan will be visible to employee. Scenario II: Only Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No AND NH Effective Date rules not set . Then, plan will be visible accordingly to Employee New hire. Example- 1. Additional Criteria on Plan Eligibility : Is New Hire = No Employee Hire Date : 12/20/2017 Plan's Effective Date = 12/20/2017 As per system behavior, At the Effective Date of 12/20/2017 employee will be New Hire . So, as per 1st criteria in plan customization, plan will not be visible to employee. Note: As per system behavior, first priority is always given to plan Dating Eligibility Rule. Observation: If we are setting additional criteria as Is New Hire = No AND also setting NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period on plan design, then both the conditions are contradicting to each other by checking New Hire and adding Waiting Period to NH Effective Date. If we don't want to show plan in New Hire, use either additional criteria as Is New Hire = No OR NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period on plan design. 1. If we set criteria Is New Hire = No , then It'll not show plan in New Hire mode , it'll only visible after New Hire. OR 2. If we set NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period , then It'll show plan exactly after waiting period time . QA Comments: We have tried to achieve result with below customization on Hspl copy. 1. Created Split Plans for New Hire and Existing Employee 2. Created two Eligibility rules for existing and new Hire employees 3. For New Hire Employee Plan customization: Additional criteria : Is New Hire Yes And Employer. Two Year Indicator not equal to Y Dating Eligibility Rule : New Hire Effective Date Rule Use Waiting period > XX months from Date of Hire > 6 Now with this customization, New Hire Employee will not get the Plan in tunnel. 4. For Existing Employee Plan Additional criteria : Is New Hire No And with this customization, existing employee will get plan as per mode available. Thanks, Niteen S. CC: Swapnil Pandhare Satya Gaurav Sodani Sheetal Bodhale Umesh Kadam Priya Dhamande
            Hide
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment -

            Amannda Johnson,

            We can have call on Tuesday if more inputs required from our end.

            Satya Gaurav Sodani Sheetal Bodhale Umesh Kadam Niteen Surwase Hrishikesh Deshpande

            Show
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment - Amannda Johnson , We can have call on Tuesday if more inputs required from our end. Satya Gaurav Sodani Sheetal Bodhale Umesh Kadam Niteen Surwase Hrishikesh Deshpande
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 28h [ 100800 ] 20h [ 72000 ]
            Time Spent 45h 44m [ 164640 ] 53h 44m [ 193440 ]
            Worklog Id 98893 [ 98893 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 20h [ 72000 ] 17.5h [ 63000 ]
            Time Spent 53h 44m [ 193440 ] 56h 14m [ 202440 ]
            Worklog Id 98898 [ 98898 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 29/Dec/17 01:15 PM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              4h
               

              issue repro
              Analysis
              Discussion
              Workaround on hspl copy

            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 17.5h [ 63000 ] 15h [ 54000 ]
            Time Spent 56h 14m [ 202440 ] 58h 44m [ 211440 ]
            Worklog Id 98899 [ 98899 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 15h [ 54000 ] 13.5h [ 48600 ]
            Time Spent 58h 44m [ 211440 ] 60h 14m [ 216840 ]
            Worklog Id 98899 [ 98899 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 29/Dec/17 01:18 PM
            • Time Spent:
              2h
               

              Test cases updation

            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 13.5h [ 48600 ] 10.5h [ 37800 ]
            Time Spent 60h 14m [ 216840 ] 63h 14m [ 227640 ]
            Worklog Id 98901 [ 98901 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 10.5h [ 37800 ] 8.5h [ 30600 ]
            Time Spent 63h 14m [ 227640 ] 65h 14m [ 234840 ]
            Worklog Id 98903 [ 98903 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 8.5h [ 30600 ] 7.5h [ 27000 ]
            Time Spent 65h 14m [ 234840 ] 66h 14m [ 238440 ]
            Worklog Id 98007 [ 98007 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 29/Dec/17 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              8h
               

              Debugging Code for this ticket.
              Full Analysis for this Plan eligibility
              Discussion with Gaurav, Swapnil, Satya, Priya and Sheetal
              Comments in JIRA

            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) logged work - 30/Dec/17 12:16 AM
            • Time Spent:
              1.5h
               

              Discussion with Swapnil,umesh ,niteen and satya
              Comment review

            Hide
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment -

            Niteen Surwase
            Based on a conversation with Amit Thorve, back on 11/21/17, if the additional eligibility has Is New Hire = No AND the New Hire effective date rules are set the New Hire Effective date rule should not over the additional eligibility rule. We have both rules set this way after the 31 day window closes for the New Hire the earliest effective date that they can get, should they use the ESPP QE, would be 6 months from Date of Hire.

            You mention "If we don't want to show plan in New Hire, use either additional criteria as Is New Hire = No OR NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period on plan design." However I removed the Is New Hire = No from the additional eligibility and left the NH Effective Date rules on the plan design and the plan still shows in the employees new hire enrollment tunnel.

            The purpose of use both the and Is New Hire = No + the 6months from DOH NH effective date rule is to help make sure the plan doesn't show up in the new hire enrollment and to make sure that when the new hire enrollment window is over (31 days from doh) the earliest effective the employee could get on the ESPP plan is 6months from the date of hire.

            Priya Dhamande
            For Tuesday, regarding a call, Yes if there are still questions on what is needed lets have a call on Tuesday. Please let me know what time is best this way I can help make myself available to discuss.

            Show
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment - Niteen Surwase Based on a conversation with Amit Thorve , back on 11/21/17, if the additional eligibility has Is New Hire = No AND the New Hire effective date rules are set the New Hire Effective date rule should not over the additional eligibility rule. We have both rules set this way after the 31 day window closes for the New Hire the earliest effective date that they can get, should they use the ESPP QE, would be 6 months from Date of Hire. You mention "If we don't want to show plan in New Hire, use either additional criteria as Is New Hire = No OR NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period on plan design." However I removed the Is New Hire = No from the additional eligibility and left the NH Effective Date rules on the plan design and the plan still shows in the employees new hire enrollment tunnel. The purpose of use both the and Is New Hire = No + the 6months from DOH NH effective date rule is to help make sure the plan doesn't show up in the new hire enrollment and to make sure that when the new hire enrollment window is over (31 days from doh) the earliest effective the employee could get on the ESPP plan is 6months from the date of hire. Priya Dhamande For Tuesday, regarding a call, Yes if there are still questions on what is needed lets have a call on Tuesday. Please let me know what time is best this way I can help make myself available to discuss.
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 02/Jan/18 11:09 AM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              1h
               
              • Discussion and analysis on work around
              • Split Plan workaround on hspl copy
            Hide
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi All,

            Attaching the production deployment approval email for reference

            Regards
            Gaurav

            Show
            gaurav.sodani Gaurav Sodani (Inactive) added a comment - Hi All, Attaching the production deployment approval email for reference Regards Gaurav
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 02/Jan/18 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              8h
               

              Analysis for this issue.
              Discussion with Priya, satya, Umesh, Gaurav.
              Checking and debugging for system behavior

            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) logged work - 02/Jan/18 07:37 PM
            • Time Spent:
              1h
               

              Discussion with Niteen, Satya, Gaurav, Amruta

            Hide
            amitthorve Amit Thorve (Inactive) added a comment -

            What is the resolution for this? As per my understanding the eligibility rules should always kick in first and then the effective date rules. If employee is not eligible for the plan then why the plan should show up in the tunnel of new hire?

            Show
            amitthorve Amit Thorve (Inactive) added a comment - What is the resolution for this? As per my understanding the eligibility rules should always kick in first and then the effective date rules. If employee is not eligible for the plan then why the plan should show up in the tunnel of new hire?
            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) logged work - 03/Jan/18 06:34 AM
            • Time Spent:
              0.25h
               

              Discussion with Niteen

            Hide
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Amannda Johnson

            This is the system behaviour. On plan level NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period is set then eligibility of that plan will check as per rule effective date.
            Currently, we cant achieve the requirement by using NH Effective Date rule.
            So please remove NH Effective Date rule and keep the additional criteria as Is New Hire = No.
            To achieve mentioned requirement, we need enhancement. So we will create another ticket for workaround/enhancement after our call discussion.

            Note:
            As per discussion with Amit Thorve, employee will raise QE and then will do enrollment in this plan but effective date should be 6 months after new hire.
            So approach is, same like new hire we need to introduce QE rule on plan level. We are doing more analysis on this.

            Meanwhile, we are thinking on short term workaround and will get back to you.

            Thanks,
            Niteen S.

            Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Satya Gaurav Sodani Amruta Lohiya Umesh Kadam Jyoti Mayne Priya Dhamande

            Show
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Amannda Johnson This is the system behaviour. On plan level NH Effective Date rules with Waiting Period is set then eligibility of that plan will check as per rule effective date. Currently, we cant achieve the requirement by using NH Effective Date rule. So please remove NH Effective Date rule and keep the additional criteria as Is New Hire = No . To achieve mentioned requirement, we need enhancement. So we will create another ticket for workaround/enhancement after our call discussion. Note: As per discussion with Amit Thorve , employee will raise QE and then will do enrollment in this plan but effective date should be 6 months after new hire. So approach is, same like new hire we need to introduce QE rule on plan level. We are doing more analysis on this. Meanwhile, we are thinking on short term workaround and will get back to you. Thanks, Niteen S. Cc: Swapnil Pandhare Satya Gaurav Sodani Amruta Lohiya Umesh Kadam Jyoti Mayne Priya Dhamande
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 03/Jan/18 11:10 AM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              3h
               
              • Call
              • MOM
              • discussion
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 03/Jan/18 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              6h
               

              Code Debug, Discussion and Looking for workaround,
              Meeting with Amit, Amruta, Gaurav and Priya.
              Analysis on Qualifying Event.
              Client Call

            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) logged work - 03/Jan/18 07:37 PM
            • Time Spent:
              1h
               

              Discussion with Niteen, Satya, Gaurav, Amruta

            sheetal.bodhale Sheetal Bodhale (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 7.5h [ 27000 ] 7.25h [ 26100 ]
            Time Spent 66h 14m [ 238440 ] 66h 29m [ 239340 ]
            Worklog Id 99268 [ 99268 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 7.25h [ 26100 ] 2.25h [ 8100 ]
            Time Spent 66h 29m [ 239340 ] 71h 29m [ 257340 ]
            Worklog Id 99317 [ 99317 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 2.25h [ 8100 ] 0h [ 0 ]
            Time Spent 71h 29m [ 257340 ] 77h 29m [ 278940 ]
            Worklog Id 99318 [ 99318 ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 77h 29m [ 278940 ] 85h 29m [ 307740 ]
            Worklog Id 99319 [ 99319 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) logged work - 04/Jan/18 11:11 AM
            • Time Spent:
              2h
               

              Analysis and discussion with team

            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne logged work - 04/Jan/18 11:47 AM
            • Time Spent:
              1h
               

              workaround discussion

            Hide
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment -

            MOM of yesterday's call

            Attendees: Amannda, Gaurav, Niteen and Priya
            Date: 03/01/2018
            Time: 9.30 to 10.05 PM IST

            Points:
            1. Explaining current System behavior
            2. Getting exact requirement from Amannda
            3. Action Point: Finding work around or Need to develop for the requirement

            Show
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment - MOM of yesterday's call Attendees: Amannda, Gaurav, Niteen and Priya Date: 03/01/2018 Time: 9.30 to 10.05 PM IST Points: 1. Explaining current System behavior 2. Getting exact requirement from Amannda 3. Action Point: Finding work around or Need to develop for the requirement
            Hide
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment -

            In order to remove the e-Trade plan from Employee tunnel with current system behavior below customization is required:

            On Plan:
            is New Hire is equal to No
            And remove New Hire Effective Date rule.

            Workaround:
            To make the Plan Effective after 6 months below customization to be done
            1. Create QE with with waiting period of 5 months
            Effective Date Rule > Use Waiting Period > 5 months from Event date
            2. Admin have to raise QE immediately after New Hire Period is completed otherwise the Effective Date may extend as per QE raised date.
            3. Now, Employee will be eligible for e-Trade Plan, effective after approx. 6 months.

            Note: Effective Date may extend, if QE not raise immediately after the New Hire window period completion. If Admin/Employee wants to enroll in Plan he should raise above created QE only.

            This is a manual and temporary work around.

            We will create new development jira for enhancement.

            Please check the same customization at your end and lets close the jira.

            Satya Gaurav Sodani Swapnil Eksambekar Umesh Kadam Amruta Lohiya Jyoti Agrawal Niteen Surwase Hrishikesh Deshpande

            Show
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) added a comment - In order to remove the e-Trade plan from Employee tunnel with current system behavior below customization is required: On Plan: is New Hire is equal to No And remove New Hire Effective Date rule. Workaround: To make the Plan Effective after 6 months below customization to be done 1. Create QE with with waiting period of 5 months Effective Date Rule > Use Waiting Period > 5 months from Event date 2. Admin have to raise QE immediately after New Hire Period is completed otherwise the Effective Date may extend as per QE raised date. 3. Now, Employee will be eligible for e-Trade Plan, effective after approx. 6 months. Note : Effective Date may extend, if QE not raise immediately after the New Hire window period completion. If Admin/Employee wants to enroll in Plan he should raise above created QE only. This is a manual and temporary work around. We will create new development jira for enhancement. Please check the same customization at your end and lets close the jira. Satya Gaurav Sodani Swapnil Eksambekar Umesh Kadam Amruta Lohiya Jyoti Agrawal Niteen Surwase Hrishikesh Deshpande
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Assignee Niteen Surwase [ niteen.surwase ] Amannda Johnson [ amjohnson ]
            niteen.surwase Niteen Surwase (Inactive) logged work - 04/Jan/18 05:00 PM
            • Time Spent:
              5h
               

              Analysis and Code Debug for workaround/enhancement.
              Workaround Meeting with Swapnil, Satya, Umesh and Priya.

            Hide
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment -

            Jennifer Reed - Jackie Sivigny and I spoke today. Can we get this added to the list to get transitioned from a BUG to an enhancement?

            Show
            amjohnson Amannda Johnson added a comment - Jennifer Reed - Jackie Sivigny and I spoke today. Can we get this added to the list to get transitioned from a BUG to an enhancement?
            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) logged work - 04/Jan/18 07:36 PM
            • Time Spent:
              2h
               

              Analysis and discussion with enrollment and QA team

            Jennifer.Reed Jennifer Reed (Inactive) made changes -
            Issue Type Bug [ 1 ] Enhancement [ 4 ]
            Workflow WT_Defects [ 58288 ] WT_Features [ 61107 ]
            Jennifer.Reed Jennifer Reed (Inactive) made changes -
            Priority Highest [ 1 ] Medium [ 3 ]
            Hide
            Jennifer.Reed Jennifer Reed (Inactive) added a comment -

            Amannda Johnson Thanks Amannda, this has been moved to an enhancement. Satya Gaurav Sodani Can we touch base on this ticket?

            Show
            Jennifer.Reed Jennifer Reed (Inactive) added a comment - Amannda Johnson Thanks Amannda, this has been moved to an enhancement. Satya Gaurav Sodani Can we touch base on this ticket?
            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 85h 29m [ 307740 ] 87h 29m [ 314940 ]
            Worklog Id 99412 [ 99412 ]
            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 87h 29m [ 314940 ] 88h 29m [ 318540 ]
            Worklog Id 99413 [ 99413 ]
            swapnil.pandhare Swapnil Pandhare (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 88h 29m [ 318540 ] 89h 29m [ 322140 ]
            Worklog Id 99414 [ 99414 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 89h 29m [ 322140 ] 92h 29m [ 332940 ]
            Worklog Id 100014 [ 100014 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 92h 29m [ 332940 ] 95h 29m [ 343740 ]
            Worklog Id 100015 [ 100015 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Worklog Id 100015 [ 100015 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Worklog Id 100015 [ 100015 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Time Spent 95h 29m [ 343740 ] 97h 29m [ 350940 ]
            Worklog Id 100016 [ 100016 ]
            priya.dhamande Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 0h [ 0 ] 2h [ 7200 ]
            Time Spent 97h 29m [ 350940 ] 95h 29m [ 343740 ]
            Worklog Id 100014 [ 100014 ]
            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 2h [ 7200 ] 1h [ 3600 ]
            Time Spent 95h 29m [ 343740 ] 96h 29m [ 347340 ]
            Worklog Id 101572 [ 101572 ]
            rohan.khandave Rohan J Khandave (Inactive) logged work - 29/Jan/18 04:38 PM
            • Time Spent:
              1.5h
               

              Design team meeting

            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne logged work - 29/Jan/18 05:05 PM - edited
            • Time Spent:
              0.75h
               

              scenario and workaround discussion with Amruta

            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 1h [ 3600 ] 0.25h [ 900 ]
            Time Spent 96h 29m [ 347340 ] 97h 14m [ 350040 ]
            Worklog Id 102451 [ 102451 ]
            jyoti.mayne Jyoti Mayne made changes -
            Worklog Id 102451 [ 102451 ]
            rohan.khandave Rohan J Khandave (Inactive) made changes -
            Remaining Estimate 0.25h [ 900 ] 0h [ 0 ]
            Time Spent 97h 14m [ 350040 ] 98h 44m [ 355440 ]
            Worklog Id 103599 [ 103599 ]
            Hide
            satyap Satya added a comment -

            Hi Jennifer Reed,

            As discussed in our call on 29th Jan 2018, Amannda Johnson was trying this through customization on BioRad-stage copy.

            Please let us know in case you hear updates on this?

            Regards,
            Satya Prakash

            Show
            satyap Satya added a comment - Hi Jennifer Reed , As discussed in our call on 29th Jan 2018, Amannda Johnson was trying this through customization on BioRad-stage copy. Please let us know in case you hear updates on this? Regards, Satya Prakash
            satyap Satya made changes -
            Dev Estimates 15
            satyap Satya made changes -
            QA Estimates 8
            Transition Time In Source Status Execution Times
            Rohit Shete (Inactive) made transition -
            Open In Development
            1h 1m 1
            Rakesh Roy (Inactive) made transition -
            In LB Testing Reopen in Local
            3d 23h 28m 1
            Rakesh Roy (Inactive) made transition -
            Reopen in Local In Development
            4s 1
            Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made transition -
            In Development In LB Testing
            23d 50m 2
            Hrishikesh Deshpande (Inactive) made transition -
            In LB Testing Stage Testing
            8d 18m 1
            Priya Dhamande (Inactive) made transition -
            Stage Testing Reopened in Stage
            1d 5h 20m 1
            Niteen Surwase (Inactive) made transition -
            Reopened in Stage In Development
            19h 5m 1

              People

              Assignee:
              amjohnson Amannda Johnson
              Reporter:
              amjohnson Amannda Johnson
              QA:
              Hrishikesh Deshpande (Inactive)
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              13 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:
                Dev Due Date:
                Pre-Prod Due Date:
                Production Due Date:

                  Time Tracking

                  Estimated:
                  Original Estimate - 15h Original Estimate - 15h
                  15h
                  Remaining:
                  Remaining Estimate - 0h
                  0h
                  Logged:
                  Time Spent - 98h 44m
                  98h 44m