Home › Forums › Discussion Forum › Project ID Findings and Recommendations
Tagged: Project ID; unique id
Here is what I have found and some recommended enhancements (assuming my findings are correct). If I am correct, I want to ask an MVP to help send the recommendations to MS. Can someone confirm my findings and comment on my recommendations?
Project ID Findings:
1. Each Project Type has its own counter which can be defined to include a number plus a prefix and/or a postfix.
2. Project Types should have the unique Project ID definition. Otherwise, duplicate Project ID’s can be created.
4. Existing projects are not retroactively assigned an ID. However, you can go in assign one.
5. If you create a project using Project Pro, the Project ID is set to the next valid value for an Enterprise Project Type. (Project Pro does not let you choose a Project Type. Instead it lets you create a project from scratch or choose a template. )
Assuming the above findings are correct, the following enhancements are recommended:
1. Make “Edit Project ID” a permission you can turn of on/off for a group of users.
2. Allow a Project Type’s Project ID definition to be set to use the default Enterprise Project Type’s definition. This would allow some of all project types to use the same definition and avoid duplicate Project IDs.
3. Option to set Project ID for all existing projects. ( I only had 100 projects to set given we just started using PWA. I cannot imagine having to set the field for 100’s of projects.)
4. Require Project ID entries to be unique.
5. Allow a Project Type to be chosen when creating a project in Project Pro. This would make Project Pro and PWA work the same in terms of setting a template, Project ID definition, and workflow.
Thanks
John
I think your description is accurate and your recommendations are reasonable. Good luck…
I have shared this finding and recommendation to the MS. I will keep you posted on their reply.
Larry,
Thanks for confirming my findings.
Sai,
Thanks for passing it along to MS. I look forward to MS’s response.
Thanks,
John