Can the determined priority of ATC-checks be tweaked?

[BaerbelWinkler]

Hi Folks,

I'm fairly certain that I saw a response to this question somewhere already but regardless of what I search for I'm not able to find it. So, please excuse this most likely duplicate question.

What I'd like to do is to customize the determined priority of several ATC-checks to better suit our needs. Some of the checks with default priority 1 & 2 findings would currently generate way too many hits which prevents us from using the checks to block transports from leaving the DEV-system.

We currently have the ATC-checks enabled during transport release but only for informational purposes, they can still be ignored. The plan is to change this to block transports with priority 1 & 2 errors but we'll then have to avoid too many false hits preventing a timely release of the transports.

We are on 740 SP 11

Thanks for any pointers you have!

Cheers

Baerbel

[BaerbelWinkler]

In case that this is of interest to others, here is the answer (which I re-discovered in the depth of my mail program of all places!)

In Transaction SCI use menue-entry Goto --> Management of --> Message Priorities

Open the node in the tree structure to display the relevant check, then click on the current status icon and select the new one:

The new setting will take hold immediately when SCI/ATC are executed the next time.

[Jelena]

Baerbel, thanks for following up on this and sharing the answer! Please click "Accept answer" button underneath the answer, so that this question is marked as "answered". This will save time for those who search for the questions that still need to be answered. Thank you!

[BaerbelWinkler]

Thanks, Jelena! I wasn't quite sure if it's "appropriate" to accept my own response as the best/correct one. But, at a guess, the gaming aspect of Answers with regards to e.g. karma-points and the like should be "intelligent" enough to just disregard them. And then, perhaps nobody pays attention to these anyway!

[Jelena]

I know what you mean. I'm a bit fuzzy on the "karma points" but in the old SCN if you marked your own answer as correct you did not actually get any points. Either way, this actually has been quite an appropriate action all along. Thanks for following up on this!

[albanleong]

Thanks for sharing the solution! I was also looking for something similar.

[manish_gupta32]

Hello Bärbel,

How do we identify which is priority 1, 2 and 3?
Do the traffic light colors signify something?

Regards,
Manish

[BaerbelWinkler]

manishgupta0311

Hi Manish,

yes:

green = 3 = information
yellow = 2 = warning
red = 1 = error

Cheers

Bärbel

[Uli_42]

Hy Bärbel,

for some SLIN checks i can't find any entry in SCI .

But i would like to change the default priority ( i also would like to fin a possibility to make them ATC relevant ).

Do you know of any óf them..

( I am particulary keen on check B 0906 . Unused variables as i find this to be one of the most useful one for bad coding )

regards

Uli

[BaerbelWinkler]

ulrich.becker3

Hi Uli,

I'm not sure if changing the default priority is possible for this particular check, but most likely not if it's not shown in SCI. This would be a question for olga.dolinskaja to let us know if there's a technical restriction or if it could make sense for you to raise an OSS incident.

I don't see the check listed in the ATC-options in our central system under the SLIN-node either.

Perhaps there's something in the abapOpenChecks on Github you could use?

https://docs.abapopenchecks.org/

As I haven't used any of these yet I however won't be much help.

Cheers

Bärbel

[declan_sweeney89]

Hi Barbel, Ulrich,

Do you know you can achieve this in full, and provide separate priorities for individual checks for individual systems through the CCLM Quality Cockpit?

For example any ATC check can be "adapted" for any particular quality "Project". A quality project is created on top of the ATC analyses, and offers more features such as the usage information collected by CCLM & more.

This means you can alter the priority of any check item (from Prio 1-2 for example), for a single project, and have that same check item remain as prio1 for another "project".

If you are using Solution Manager CCLM, then I would highly recommend this option, rather than changing the source priority.

Best Regards,

Declan

[BaerbelWinkler]

declan.sweeney89

Hi Declan,

thanks for your feedback! We however don't have Solution Manager CCLM active as far as I know, so it's not an alternative right now.

Cheers

Bärbel

[Uli_42]

Hy,

even when this cclm on a central Solman would be used, it would not help for the example when a check not even is a ATC check. ( And i don't hink we will get something like this soon. )

It must be possible to change that and make it a ATC check as i found it being called in ADT in another blog with screenshots showing the warnings in ADT.

It's a bit off/cross-topic, but i hope not too annoying.

[andreas_goeb]

Hello Bärbel,

thanks a lot for taking the time to answer your question yourself. I just came across the same issue. However, I do not see the "Management Of..." entry in the "Goto" menu. Just "Exceptions" and "Back". We are on 7.51. Do you know whether this functionality has been (re-)moved?

Thanks a lot,
Andreas

[BaerbelWinkler]

Hi Andreas,

you are welcome!

Seems unlikely that this option got removed, but I cannot check as we don't have a 7.51 system. I only know the priorities can be tweaked as described both in 7.50 and 7.52.

Did you check SU53 to see if you might have run into an authorization-issue which prevents you seeing the option in the menu?

Cheers

Bärbel

[JeffCarty]

Looking at a 7.52 System it looks like it moved from Goto-->Management of and is now under Code Inspector--> Management of.

[andreas_goeb]

Thanks Jeff, this is exactly where it is in our system as well.

[tursko]

For newer systems the option will be under "Code Inspector" -> "Management of", instead of it previously being under "GoTo".