DATA pernr TYPE pernr_d VALUE 1.
DATA(time_accounts) = cl_hcmfab_att_abs_bl_apis=>get_instance( )->read_time_accounts( iv_pernr = pernr
iv_begda = sy-datum
iv_endda = sy-datum ). "iv_endda is never used!
cl_demo_output=>display( time_accounts ).
Although there is an obligatory iv_endda parameter, it is never used inside of method read_time_accounts. Instead, there is some logic which checks for a T77S0 Parameter, and it will use either highdate or begda as endda value.
IMO, it would have made sense to mark iv_endda as optional, so it would be downward compatible and the parameter could be omitted on newer releases. Now it is a bit misleading.
By using line_exists you can check if a line exists or not exists, but it is not possible to use other comparison operators. A workaround can be REDUCE in that case.
In the following snippet, we want to check if there is a flight that costs more than $1000,
SELECT * FROM sflight INTO TABLE @DATA(flights).
* Check if flight with price > 1000 exist
IF REDUCE abap_bool( INIT price_gt_1000 = abap_false
FOR line IN flights WHERE ( price > 1000 )
NEXT price_gt_1000 = abap_true ) EQ abap_true.
" flight with price > 1000 exists
ENDIF.
Since my workflow was already in this state, I had to find another way, and found it with transaction code SWWL. Simply find the unique Identification of the top level workitem via t-code SWIA and then use it in SWWL. When running the report, you will first get a list, then simply select the result items you want to delete and hit the trash icon, or restart the selection and check the flag for Delete immediately.
I had to calculate the difference between two times, even if the end time goes beyond the 0 o’clock day limit, e.g. 20:00 to 02:00 should be 6h. I found the following two function modules doing the job:
* Option 1
CALL FUNCTION 'CATS_COMPUTE_HOURS'
EXPORTING
pernr = pernr
date = date
* NO_BREAK_DEDUCTION = ' '
row = row
TABLES
return = return
CHANGING
catshours = catshours
beguz = beguz
enduz = enduz
vtken = vtken.
* Option 2 (I think it's only available on S/4 HANA)
CALL FUNCTION 'CATS_DETERMINE_HOURS'
CHANGING
catshours = catshours
beguz = beguz
enduz = enduz.
Customizing SPRO → Personnel Management → Employee Self-Service (Web Dynpro ABAP) → Service-Specific Settings → Working Time → My Overtime Requests.
Adjusting the Fiori UI
If you want to hide fields in the Fiori frontend, or you want to adjust some labels, you can simply do this via Customizing: My Overtime Requests → Layout of the Web Application → Define Field Selection
Multi-Level Approval for Time Data Requests (HRPT_B_TMD_MULTI_APPROVERS)
The BAdI is called when opening the My Overtime Request App and a second time when clicking on the New Button to create a new OVT request. It’s not triggered when sending the request, what I initially expected. To reuse the code from the sample class,
* "Determine approver level
* DATA(cust_key_request_fields) = VALUE cl_hrpt_ovt_const=>ovt_cust_key_request_fields( pernr = iv_pernr
* ktart = iv_subtype
* date = is_request_period-start_date ).
* TRY.
* DATA(approval_settings) = cl_hrpt_ovt_cust_factory=>get_customizing_reader( )->get_approval_settings( REF #( cust_key_request_fields ) ).
* CATCH cx_hrpt_tmd.
* RETURN.
* ENDTRY.
* IF approval_settings-use_multiple_approver = abap_false.
* RETURN.
* ENDIF.
....
* "If no last approvers exist, use line manager, HR BP and HR Admin by default
* CALL FUNCTION 'BAPI_GET_LINE_MANAGER'
* EXPORTING
* im_objid = iv_pernr
* IMPORTING
* es_approver = line_manager
* ev_has_manager = approver_exists.
* IF approver_exists = abap_true.
* last_seqnr = last_seqnr + 1.
* line_manager-seqnr = last_seqnr.
* APPEND line_manager TO rt_approver_tab.
* IF lines( rt_approver_tab ) >= approval_settings-approver_level.
* RETURN.
* ENDIF.
* ENDIF.
you have to set the amount of approval steps in the customizing.
Custom Workflow
If you want to replace the default Workflow WS02400057 (PT_OVTREQ) with a custom one, you must adjust the customizing (as described here for the standard WF), and you’ll need to create a new BAdI Implementation for HCMFAB_MYOTQ_APPROVAL_INBOX analog HCMFAB_MYOTQ_APPROVAL_INBOX to get the Approve and Rejects Buttons working by providing the Workflow-ID and decision Step-ID.
Extensibility
Although it should be possible to extend both Fiori Apps via Adaptation Projects, I was unable to do so. Either it’s a problem with the new adaption editor, which got new released while writing the blog, or it is a problem with the apps itself. Whatever I tried, I was always running in issues.
Therefore, I did it the “classic” way and created an Extension Project and used the provided Extension Points. For the Approval App, I was unable to preview the application directly in BAS, perhaps because it is only an Inbox integration and does not run standalone. I therefore always had to deploy, to test my changes.
Somehow I did something stupid yesterday. I created a new OData Service via SEGW and after generating it, the classes had a _01 in the name, which of course was not what I wanted. So I came up with the idea of simply deleting the 4 generated classes and regenerate the service. That worked fine, and the classes then got the right name. But when I tried to add the service via /iwfnd/maint_service, I got the following error:
Somehow, the service was still looking for a class that I had deleted because it had an incorrect name.
When I opened the service via /iwbep/reg_service, I saw that in the model information, that there was still the incorrect class name for the model provider class. So I needed to update the model provider class which was assigned to the technical model. This was possible via /iwbep/reg_model (Report /IWBEP/R_DST_MODEL_BUILDER). This report can also be accessed by clicking on “Create model” in the /iwbep/reg_service transaction, but the required “Change” button is then deactivated, so be sure to open it in a separate GUI window. After adjusting the model provider class, I was finally able to add the service successfully via /iwfnd/maint_service.
Next time, instead of deleting the classes, betting delete the full OData Service (like it is described here) and create a complete new one.
Recently I was continuing an enhancement project of a standard Fiori Application. The already existing enhancement project was created using WebIDE a few years ago. Now I needed to add some more functionality to the enhancement project using the Business Application Studio. To my surprise, the automatic migration of the WebIDE project to a BAS project was working without any issues. Nice! I could make my changes and everything was fine until I tried to deploy the application.
The abap_deploy_taskaborted with the error “Request is not a local Request” (in German “Auftrag ist kein lokaler Auftrag“).
Somehow it did not deploy in my Workbench Transport Request and was expecting a Local Transport Request.
At first, I thought, this was a problem in the ui5-deploy.yaml configuration of my App, and therefore I was looking in the wrong direction. But after checking the package of the already deployed enhancement project in the backend, I finally found the reason. The Transport Layer of the Package containing the BSP application was not correct. It turned out, that the previous developer was not able to deploy from his WebIDE directly to the system, instead he deployed to another system, exported and then imported the transport request manually. Therefore, the “Original System” of all objects was incorrect and also the Transport Layer on the Package. After updating both (like described here), I was able to deploy the enhancement project successfully in my Workbench Transport Request.
