Bishopric members all under custom positions - lost financial authorization

Discussions around using and interfacing with the Church MLS program.
TinMan
Member
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:08 am
Location: Bountiful, UT, USA

#21

Post by TinMan »

No problem Ryan, thanks for checking into it for us. If you need me to give you anything else, let me know.

:)
giffordrb
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:24 am
Location: Eagle Mountain UT

#22

Post by giffordrb »

Update on this issue:

I am still trying to wrap my head around how this happened, but we have identified a fix for it. Here is how it probably happened, for what it's worth. When upgrading to 3.5 MLS reads in a file from cdol that contains all of the standard positions (positions, not callings). These are compared against the standard positions already existing in MLS. If there is a standard position existing in MLS that doesn't appear in the new file MLS will mark that position as deleted making it unavailable for use. My guess is that there was an error processing that file making MLS mark quite a few positions as deleted. I'm trying to figure out where the custom positions came from - it appears every deleted standard position now has a corresponding custom position, even outside of the bishopric.


EDIT:
MLS created the custom positions automatically when it didn't find the standard positions in the cdol file. The code fix will stop this from happening and get the positions marked as standard positions again. Unfortunately units that are already on 3.5 that are experiencing this issue will have to
* Upgrade to the latest 3.5 when it is pushed out later this week
* Pull down a new cdol positions and refresh file after mls has been upgraded
Patches for MLS containing this fix will be out before Sunday - most likely Thursday. I will get in contact with LUS and make sure they are aware of the issue.

Question: Would you rather see a cdol refresh file staged automatically for your unit, or would you rather manually request one from MLS once the upgrade has happened? You will have more control doing the latter.
Ryan Gifford
MLS
rolandc
Member
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 8:20 pm

#23

Post by rolandc »

Manually Request.
Roland
lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 11475
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: US

#24

Post by lajackson »

giffordrb wrote:Question: Would you rather see a cdol refresh file staged automatically for your unit, or would you rather manually request one from MLS once the upgrade has happened? You will have more control doing the latter.

If you choose to follow the manual request route, I believe it would be helpful to send a brief MLS message letting folks know of the situation and the simple step needed if they wish to receive the CDOL refresh.

They could read the message and either note that everything is fine, or request the refresh at that time.

And thank you for the update.
TinMan
Member
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:08 am
Location: Bountiful, UT, USA

#25

Post by TinMan »

giffordrb wrote:

* Pull down a new cdol positions and refresh file after mls has been upgraded
Patches for MLS containing this fix will be out before Sunday - most likely Thursday. I will get in contact with LUS and make sure they are aware of the issue.

Question: Would you rather see a cdol refresh file staged automatically for your unit, or would you rather manually request one from MLS once the upgrade has happened? You will have more control doing the latter.
Depends on how "dumbed down" the instructions are. I don't understand this step at all. :)

If you can't dumb them down sufficiently, then just doing it automatically would be my vote.

And a second: Thanks for checking into this for us.
giffordrb
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:24 am
Location: Eagle Mountain UT

#26

Post by giffordrb »

After the upgrade the process in MLS would be to click on File->Request Unit Refresh Data, then selecting Membership Records. The next send/receive will request a CDOL and CMIS (membership) refresh. They will then be created and ready on a subsequent send/receive. The trouble with automatically staging them will be timing - making sure the steps happen in the correct order. It wouldn't do any good to process the refresh file, for example, with the current 3.5 code.
Ryan Gifford
MLS
TinMan
Member
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:08 am
Location: Bountiful, UT, USA

#27

Post by TinMan »

I think if you put "Steps must be done in order" and a 1 and a 2 and a 3, I think I could figure that out.

:)

When we upgrade to the "latest" 3.5, will we have to do the send and receive 3 times thirty minutes apart thing again?
giffordrb
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:24 am
Location: Eagle Mountain UT

#28

Post by giffordrb »

TinMan wrote:I think if you put "Steps must be done in order" and a 1 and a 2 and a 3, I think I could figure that out.

:)

When we upgrade to the "latest" 3.5, will we have to do the send and receive 3 times thirty minutes apart thing again?

I will make sure the steps are better spelled out for this fix - I have made it sound more complicated than it is in the spirit of over-communication. Multiple send/receives will have to be done, and you will have to wait for the cdol refresh file to generate, which could take 30 minutes. But it should only have to happen once, and we want to get this out before Friday.
Ryan Gifford
MLS
TinMan
Member
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:08 am
Location: Bountiful, UT, USA

#29

Post by TinMan »

Thanks. Again. I appreciate your personal attention to this. I know it probably hasn't been a pleasant week for you at work.

:)
rontilby
Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:22 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA

#30

Post by rontilby »

If the CDOL Refresh might result in removal or addition or re-arrangement of callings in MLS, then that should be clearly stated, with a recommendation for printing a full callings by organization report before and after the CDOL Refresh with review and correction afterwards.
Locked

Return to “MLS Support, Help, and Feedback”