WORKTERRAProject Type: software

WORKTERRA

Uploaded image for project: 'WORKTERRA'
  1. WORKTERRA
  2. WT-9237

Rule Engine - FIELD as RESULT

    Details

    • Type: Enhancement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Critical
    • Resolution: Done
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: BenAdmin
    • Labels:
      None
    • Module:
      BenAdmin - Export
    • Reported by:
      Support
    • Item State:
      Production Complete - Closed
    • Issue Importance:
      Must Have
    • Sprint:
      WT Sprint 34 - Enhancements, WT Sprint 36 - Enhancement
    • Feature Category:
      New
    • Severity:
      Simple
    • Reported by Customer:
      Abhay Patil

      Description

      Rule Engine: Ability to specify a field (rather than a hard coded value) as result.
      This is a top priority requirement.

      Samir Amit Thorve Cindy Wibbing

        Attachments

          Issue Links

          causes

          Bug - A problem which impairs or prevents the functions of the product. WT-10951 Export > Rule Engine - FIELD as RESULT > 'Select Field Name' drop down Is getting displayed in empty space on ANSI 834 Template

          • High - Serious problem that could block progress.
          • Closed

          Bug - A problem which impairs or prevents the functions of the product. WT-11160 Getting blank value on export file for Rule Engine as a Result for Employee Status Field

          • Medium - Has the potential to affect progress.
          • Closed
          is cloned by

          Enhancement - An improvement or enhancement to an existing feature or task. NF-4338 CLONE - Rule Engine - FIELD as RESULT New UI

          • Critical - This problem will block progress.
          • Resolution Setting
          is duplicated by

          Enhancement - An improvement or enhancement to an existing feature or task. WT-41 Export: Database fields implementation on rule engine -- Analysis

          • High - Serious problem that could block progress.
          • Closed

            Activity

            Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
            Hide
            Permalink
            Vinayak.Kulkarni Vinayak Kulkarni (Inactive) added a comment -

            Analysis done and WBS is attached, would pick this up in upcoming sprint. Thanks.

            Show
            Vinayak.Kulkarni Vinayak Kulkarni (Inactive) added a comment - Analysis done and WBS is attached, would pick this up in upcoming sprint. Thanks.
            Hide
            Permalink
            rajendra.pawar Rajendra Pawar (Inactive) added a comment -

            We are considering implementation in ANSI member level details page and DTS on rule engine page for DTS applicable fields. So changing Dev Due Date to 01-August-2017.

            Show
            rajendra.pawar Rajendra Pawar (Inactive) added a comment - We are considering implementation in ANSI member level details page and DTS on rule engine page for DTS applicable fields. So changing Dev Due Date to 01-August-2017.
            Hide
            Permalink
            rajendra.pawar Rajendra Pawar (Inactive) added a comment -

            Below are the Note :
            1) Current all Live feeds rule engine will work as it is.
            2) Only direct database and additional fields are working currently (Please see attached fileRule Engine Fields.xls).
            3) DTS feature has been provided for available direct DTS applicable fields at rule engine page.
            4) ANSI member level details conditional rule engine has been implemented as per new approach.
            5) Macro fields will not work, we will plan them after some days.
            6) For Date type fields, specified date format has been applied as per settings.
            7) Amount with decimal has also been applied for applicable fields.

            Vinayak Kulkarni,Ganesh Sadawarte Rakesh Shahane

            Show
            rajendra.pawar Rajendra Pawar (Inactive) added a comment - Below are the Note : 1) Current all Live feeds rule engine will work as it is. 2) Only direct database and additional fields are working currently (Please see attached file Rule Engine Fields.xls ). 3) DTS feature has been provided for available direct DTS applicable fields at rule engine page. 4) ANSI member level details conditional rule engine has been implemented as per new approach. 5) Macro fields will not work, we will plan them after some days. 6) For Date type fields, specified date format has been applied as per settings. 7) Amount with decimal has also been applied for applicable fields. Vinayak Kulkarni , Ganesh Sadawarte Rakesh Shahane
            Hide
            Permalink
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment -

            Testing is in progress with Comparison of Current Live feeds on Production and same company templates on LB after deploying this implementation

            Show
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment - Testing is in progress with Comparison of Current Live feeds on Production and same company templates on LB after deploying this implementation
            Hide
            Permalink
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment -

            Testing is in Progress with All types of fields as a result along with DTS. Will update tomorrow

            Show
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment - Testing is in Progress with All types of fields as a result along with DTS. Will update tomorrow
            Hide
            Permalink
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment -

            Verified this implementation and its bug fixes for Field As a Result on Rule Engine for random fields of in attached sheet on Rowise, Columnwise , ANSI 834 File types . Fields are getting exported as per mapped rule engine. Working as expected on LB . Ready for Stage

            Show
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment - Verified this implementation and its bug fixes for Field As a Result on Rule Engine for random fields of in attached sheet on Rowise, Columnwise , ANSI 834 File types . Fields are getting exported as per mapped rule engine. Working as expected on LB . Ready for Stage
            Hide
            Permalink
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment -

            Verified this implementation on stage. Working as expected. Ready for Production

            Show
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment - Verified this implementation on stage. Working as expected. Ready for Production
            Hide
            Permalink
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment - - edited

            Hi Abhay Patil ,

            We have deployed and verified this implementation on Production Today . You may now close this JIRA.

            Note: Only direct database and additional fields are working for this implementation as of now.

            Please let us know in case of any queries/issues .

            Thanks & Regards,
            Aniruddha Dev

            Show
            aniruddha.dev Aniruddha Dev (Inactive) added a comment - - edited Hi Abhay Patil , We have deployed and verified this implementation on Production Today . You may now close this JIRA. Note : Only direct database and additional fields are working for this implementation as of now. Please let us know in case of any queries/issues . Thanks & Regards, Aniruddha Dev
            Hide
            Permalink
            Van.Nguyen Van Nguyen (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Alex Nguyen,

            Here is the new enhancement that you can use for Dakotaland's Lincoln file.

            Show
            Van.Nguyen Van Nguyen (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Alex Nguyen , Here is the new enhancement that you can use for Dakotaland's Lincoln file.
            Hide
            Permalink
            alexn Alex Nguyen added a comment -

            Thanks, Van. I already finished building the file and sent it off. I decided not to send any of the dependents on file, because it's not required. Only the plans were sent, but if carrier requires them then I will look into getting the spouse to come out on file with the new enhancement.

            Alex

            Show
            alexn Alex Nguyen added a comment - Thanks, Van. I already finished building the file and sent it off. I decided not to send any of the dependents on file, because it's not required. Only the plans were sent, but if carrier requires them then I will look into getting the spouse to come out on file with the new enhancement. Alex

              People

              Assignee:
              abhay.patil Abhay Patil (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              abhay.patil Abhay Patil (Inactive)
              Account Executive:
              Abhay Patil (Inactive)
              Developer:
              Rajendra Pawar (Inactive)
              QA:
              Aniruddha Dev (Inactive)
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              8 Start watching this issue

                Dates

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

                  Time Tracking

                  Estimated:
                  Original Estimate - 174h Original Estimate - 174h
                  174h
                  Remaining:
                  Remaining Estimate - 0h
                  0h
                  Logged:
                  Time Spent - 207h 55m
                  207h 55m