How to make the configuration for a cutover in a dual landscape by ChaRM?

[former_member98353]

Hi people.

I have a question that is blocking me. In the customer im working they have a dual landscape implemented conformed this way under the ChaRM control:

Maintenance landscape: DEV > QAS > PRD

Implementation landscape: DEV' > QAS' > PPRD

I have configured the retrofit functionality from DEV to DEV'.

The situation and big question i have is when a normal change is created and developed by ChaRM then pass it to QAS and finally to PPRD in the implementation landscape this need to arrive to maintenance landscape (DEV), this process as we know is the cutover, when the implementation is on the way to the Go-Live... what is required or need to be configured to do this cutover?? In my mind was to create a new transport request in the DEV system and make a repack of the transport request that arrives to PPRD system in the new one of maintenance landscape. This idea is correct or there is a better way to do the cutover in this dual landcape?

I really really appreciate your help. If one of you have documentation of this i will thank you all.

Regards

Carlos Ospino

[former_member98353]

Hi Prakhar

Very gratefull with your response. based on that i have a question... for both landscapes the transport routes are defined (is the same for both in their respective systems), if i make the transport route you mention me, this could affect the transport route defined for the maintenance landscape?? i ask this because the number of transport request is high and is too risky affect the operation process.

Other question i have is with the track you mention me there is no problem if a normal change is created from maintenance landscape and another starting from implementación landscape??

[prakhar_saxena]

Hi

do you have a technical doubt or functional doubt...............I ask this because i see a confusion.

Technically

first of all what i have shared is one of the SAP recommendation but I have clearly highlighted that it is based upon customer requirements that will decide how the setup should look like.

Infact many customer follow the other recommendation from SAP ...check the sap documentation in more detail for dual landscape and the various options available.

Functionally

first you need to understand the change process from maintenance perspective and implementation and then we can configure the same in charm.....for me charm is not controlling changes it is the best practice offered via ITIL. However every customer is different and this is why you need to find it out what is best in your case.

Later you have to setup ChaRM which is flexible enough to cater all the needs.

there are multiple ways customer have setup dual landscape in maintenance and implementation track but again ChaRM is pretty mature and stable enough to cater all the queries you have mentioned already as there are tons of customer already live with dual track ChaRM with ABAP JAVA non SAP etc.

hope this helps you further

Thanks

Prakhar

[prakhar_saxena]

Hello Carlos,

Kindly visit the below links

https://blogs.sap.com/2009/08/27/change-request-management-scenario-retrofit-functionality/

https://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/display/SM/How+to+work+with+Change+Request+Management+Enhanced+Retrofi...

https://blogs.sap.com/2014/12/09/how-to-setup-csol-and-dgp-when-using-retrofit/

normally you can setup a route like below for your implementation track(ofcourse it requires plenty of other inputs but below is many customer go for due to different testing teams etc which only have access to maintenance track but not in implementation track).

DEV' > QAS' > PPRD>DEV > QAS > PRD

Further above is supported and I have implemented many times for customer in 7.1 and 7.2 and it works without any issues so I would say you need to focus on the best way of your use case scenario because ChaRM is more flexible and you can adapt it as per your need.

ofcourse things are more complex but we can customize charm to adapt as per our requirement even if we have different version of systems etc.

Thanks

Prakhar