Background
I'm trying to prevent editing of a record based on one of it's fields having a non-blank value. I'd like to do it with permissions and sharing rules, but I'm not sure what the best way to set it up is. I'm trying to avoid triggers and adding extra fields if possible.
At my work, we're using an object to represent a Job being worked on in the field. A lot of different users need access to edit a Job in progress and so it's set with public read/write sharing rules. Once a job is completed though, it's processed by billing and has an Invoice # field filled in. Once that's set, only billing users should be able to edit the record.
What I've Tried
I first tried a validation rule that fires when Invoice # is filled and the user's profile is not the billing team. This worked initially, but caused triggers to fail when a billing user tried to edit afterwards allows the Invoice # to be set and saved, but triggers that fire afterwards then trip and fail on the validation rule.
Next and currently, I'm playing with sharing rules to accomplish this, which seems like the right path to go down. However, I also want to prevent editing of child records in a related list under the Job. It doesn't seem like I can use cross-object fields or any formula fields in a sharing rule, so I'm not sure if this is possible without using triggers.
What I Could Try
I know I can use sharing rules with a trigger to set a sort of Editable or Locked checkbox field on the record and children when the Invoice # field is set, but I really don't like the idea of that much overhead for something seemingly simple.
Question
What's the cleanest way to allow users to edit a record until a certain field is non-null, after which only a subset of users can edit? If possible, how can I extend that to child objects in a related list?
I would use an on before update trigger to accomplish this.
Something like this:
if (Trigger.isUpdate && trigger.isBefore && UserInfo.getUserRoleId() != billingRoleId) {
for (Job__c theJobRecord : Trigger.new) {
if (String.isNotBlank(theJobRecord.Invoice_Number__c)) {
theJobRecord.Name.addError('You do not have permissions to modify this record!');
}
}
}
If you want to do this inside a Validation rule check if the job record invoice number is blank or use the global merge field $UserRole and check the name of the role else fail the Validation rule.
Related
I'm working on a screen flow. The idea is to have a lookup component the user can search a contact. Then I would like to display the information from the Contact (Account Name, Contact Name, Number Email) and I would like to be able to have the user update that information if needed. I just stomped on how it can be done. I know it should be able to be pulled from the record ID in some type of way and maybe use an Assignment to display the information. Can someone guide me on a next step or if anyone has an instructional video would be helpful.
Thanks
You wouldn't be able to display the looked up contact's fields on that screen as soon as you populate that field. That would be something only possible in code (aura component or lwc).
What you can do, however is -
Get Record element after that screen element. (Get Contact, where Id = lookupcomponent.recordId)
Then EITHER:
use the new Fields (BETA) option on another screen Fields (BETA)
(this method is easier, doesn't have as much control and is limited on fields, depending on data type, you can use)
add inputs one by one and set the default values Add Fields One By One
(this method allows more control)
Then, you will need an update element. If you used the Fields (BETA) you can just update the record variable. If you did the inputs one by one, you will need to update the contact and set fields individually.
Full Flow Example
Is there an easy way to save a recordset, i mean multiple records, but only the "new ones"?
I have a table users and a users form in the view. First field you must enter is passport number, so if user already exists in database the rest of the form will be auto completed and disabled to prevent changes but if passport dont exist then you have to enter all data. As anyone can change those existing users data controls from the browser even if they are disabled, i want to make sure only new records are saved in database. First of all i thought i could find again in database and delete existing users from recordset before save, but i wonder if there is a more elegant approach.
Ty in advance.
I write this here, cause comments are too short:
Thank you for your answer, André. I'm sorry if i didnt explain perfectly, but the form is done by disabling all controls except passport and if passport dont exist (i check it on passport focusout) then the rest of controls are set to enabled. I mean, that is already done. The question was only about the saving.
The validation method you talk about, well i'm actually validating all the controls in the form and i must disable the 'unique' rule so a user can link an existing user to the current bill, otherwise it will fail validation on submit and it wont allow the user to proceed (i did this because it happened to me when testing). The actual setting is much more complicated: the form belongs to a model (bills) which is associated with 4 other models and 2 of those relationships are many to many, bills_users and bills_clients, where users are the persons who do the job and clients pay for it, but I was trying to make the question easier. Anyway, what I am looking for is, in fact, some kind of saving setting which I can't find. In documentation I found "When converting belongsToMany data, you can disable the new entity creation, by using the onlyIds option. When enabled, this option restricts belongsToMany marshalling to only use the _ids key and ignore all other data." The first half of the sentence was promising, but the explanation says different, and I actually tried it without success.
First:
Is there an easy way to save a recordset, i mean multiple records, but only the "new ones"?
Yes there is you can validate it in model, something like this:
public function buildRules(RulesChecker $rules)
{
$rules->add($rules->isUnique('passportNumber'));
return $rules;
}
This will prevent to save a duplicate passport number register, but you can different.
I have a table users and a users form in the view. First field you must enter is passport number, so if user already exists in database the rest of the form will be auto completed and disabled to prevent changes but if passport dont exist then you have to enter all data.
There is two different ways to do this:
First you have your form, you develop an ajax function when you fill the first field (passport number) this ajax function do a request to your controller to search for a passport with that number if find something get data and fill others fields and turn them just readable, else just nothing and let user fill the fields by himself
second add a step-by-step where you first do a form to try find by pass number, user fill this only field with a number then submit, on submit this search for a record, if find fill the entire next step fields, else the next step will be the rest of form with the fields to be filled.
This may help you too: https://book.cakephp.org/3.0/en/orm/validation.html
Tell me how you decided to do :)
I am using salesforce for a group project here at SJSU, the thing is this is our first time using it, and we are having a little bit of trouble programming some things on Salesforce.
What we are trying to do:
We have a section on one of our forms where users will give us authorization to use Data they submit, the usage of this data will be under the terms set by those who submit the data. If the user does not want to set limitations on their authorization for us to use the data then they can select a checkbox called labeled "none" which basically means they are setting no limitations on what we can use their data for.
What we want to do is, if users select the checkbox then we want the users to not be able to enter any text into the textbox. If users enter text into the box while the checkbox is checked we want an error message to appear which will let the user know that no data can be entered into the box if the checkbox is checked. However if no checkbox is checked then we want users to be able to enter the data. How do we go about doing this
AND (None_c = True then Limitations_c has to be empty, elseif None_c = False then Limitations_c cannot be empty.)
If you want to leverage the out of the box UI (Page Layout), then you will likely want to use Validation Rules.
https://help.salesforce.com/HTViewHelpDoc?id=fields_defining_field_validation_rules.htm&language=en_US
The gist of it is that you want to define Error criteria, so when this criteria evaluates to true, and error is thrown. In that case, you should be able to construct something similar to the following:
Checkbox1__c && NOT(ISBLANK(Text2__c))
Validation rules would be the easiest way to execute this, though checking the box would not dynamically prevent users from entering text. With a validation rule, it just wouldn't let a users save.
The nice thing about using validation rules is that you can construct them such that checking None__c will not vomit on the user unless they actually modify Limitations__c. ISCHANGED() is great for that.
If I could suggest an alternative, the way I would implement this is to treat an empty Limitations__c as None__c = True. It simplifies things for users, and you can add a formula-driven checkbox if a checkbox element is truly required.
I'm trying to create a custom rule (using the Rules module) so that every time the cron runs, this rule checks a date field in a custom content type I created. If that date has passed then I want to set a list widget from active to ended.
This is how far I get when trying to create this rule:
Set React on event to Cron maintenance tasks are performed
Add Condition > Set Select the condition to add to Data comparison > Continue
Here is the issue: Data selectors only has site and no access to field data.
Any ideas where I'm going wrong here?
The problem with Rules condition "Cron maintenance tasks are performed" is that at that point, there is no access to the node object so any checks/manipulations on the node are not possible. As a solution, instead of Event = Cron maintenance tasks are performed, use Event = Node: Content is viewed. You can leave it open for any content type so that when someone visits the website and opens at least one page, some action will be triggered.
You need to create a rules component first:
Go to Rules > Components (admin/config/workflow/rules/components)
Then create a new component and select 'Rule' from select list
Set a name for this component and in the table below select:
Data type: Text Token
Label: A name that you want
Machine name: Use the same name of the label but set here only lower case and underscore
Usage: Parameter
In the component add the condition 'Data comparison' and select node:type
Add other conditions that you want
Set the actions that you want and save
Now go to Rules (admin/config/workflow/rules) and create the rule with action on cron maintenance (as you have already done)
Jump the conditions section and in the actions:
New action: Add a variable
Value: Text
Then write the value of this variable just like the machine name of content type that you want to cycle on (if you want you can change the name and machine name of this variable in the section below)
Now add another action 'Fetch entity by property'
Entity type value: Node
Property value: Type
Data selector: the variable created at the point 8
Now add a loop in parameter list use the variable provided by 'Fetch entity by property'
Add an action in the loop (click on the link to the right of loop row) and select the component created in the point 2 and pass the variable provided by loop
I state: I do not know if it works but at least it should direct you towards the right path
Sorry for my english, I hope you understand everything :)
Yes you should be able to get this to work using the Rules module to implement what you're looking for, but I recommend you to also combine that with the Views Rules module. Some details about this module (from its project page):
Provides Views directly as Rules actions and loops to seamlessly use view result data.
The previous quote may seem a bit cryptic (it may make you think like "so what, how can this help me?"). Therefor some more details about how to move forward using these modules:
Create a view (using Views) so that you have 1 Views result (row) with all the nodes you want to be processed (related to your custom content type and if possible filter somehow using your date field). Whereas that view has fields (columns) for whatever is needed in subsequent steps, e.g the node ID, the date field, and possibly other fields as well. You'll need these View fields later on as values to be processed by your rule, "to set a list widget from active to ended*" (as in your question). Important: use a Views display type of "Rules".
Remove that "add condition" (in the custom rule you started) and, instead, use the Views Rules module to iterate over each of these Views results in a Rules action, using the Rules technique known as a "Rules Loop".
For each iteration step in your Rules loop, perform a Rules Action to "do your thing" (= to set a list widget from active to ended). At that point you'll have all data from each column of your Views results available as so called Rules Parameters. So at that point it's a piece of cake to adapt the value of that list widget for the node you're processing in that loop.
Optionally, you may also want to add whatever extra Rules Condition(s), also up to your own imagination. Typically the things you cannot, or have not yet, expressed as a Views filter. However, if you have a choice between using a Views filter and an extra Rules Condition, I recommend to go for the Views filter, because that will reduce the number of your iterations in your Rules loop (performance!).
Easy, no?
I simply want to display an input field, that will let me capture a user, so I can filter a list from a custom object by owner. CustomObject__c.OwnerId is not writable, so when I bind it to an input field, nothing is displayed on my page! I don't want to have a drop down list of users (There could be hundreds!) and I don't want to create a spurious custom object with a writeable field, related to the User object. How can I get the input field functionality for a read only field, as if it were writeable?
OwnerId field should be writeable. Unless your field security permissions are messed up or for example the field is hidden because it's a detail in Master-Detail relationship.
But when you'll manage to get it to work you'll see that most likely it's a bit weird lookup that can point to User or Queue.
If you're fine with that - great, just check the security around the field. If you need really only a lookup to user - check if you have any custom Lookup(User) field? You could create a dummy record of that type in the controller and don't do any DML with it, just use the fact it'll have the lookup.
If you don't have any custom ones - I think that Account / Contact / Opportunity owner must be a user (can't have queues). You might have to force <apex:input field... required="false"/> but other than that it should OK?