07-29-2014 9:37 AM
Hi experts!
This is more of a "theoretical" question than an actual question...
But let me explain the situation. For some time now, I've been using character "/" in my packages to have like a tree structure. So, Z/SD/001, Z/SD/002 for example.
Well... now there was an Enhancement Package upgrade in the environment I'm working on, and alas, class CL_PACKAGE_HELPER was "upgraded", along with method CHECK_PACKAGE_NAME, and I'm no longer allowed to use character "/"!
As you can imagine, this is kind of an issue for me... I was thinking about enhancing the method to just exclude the "/", but it's not that easy... another option could be to just code a nice "EXIT" at the top of the method... but I'm not comfortable having no checks at all, especially when I'm not the only one around...
On top of it, as far as I know, it's not possible to rename a package...
So, any ideas?
Thank you,
Bruno
07-31-2014 2:06 AM
You've got to love it when sap make these "enhancements"... Though to be honest I would not have used / given its an identifier for namespaces in repository object names.
Unless you can re-package ALL your development objects (which you can, but its time consuming) you probably don't have any choice except to "enhance" the cl_package_helper class... ;-o
07-31-2014 2:06 AM
You've got to love it when sap make these "enhancements"... Though to be honest I would not have used / given its an identifier for namespaces in repository object names.
Unless you can re-package ALL your development objects (which you can, but its time consuming) you probably don't have any choice except to "enhance" the cl_package_helper class... ;-o
09-23-2014 8:03 PM
Create a new package with the right name convention and put your old packages under, to encapsulate then.
It's strongly recommend work with standard allowed name convention.
04-09-2015 10:12 AM
Bruno,
we have a similar problem with older packages starting with "$".
Did you solve this problem? An how?
Regards.
Kris
04-09-2015 10:27 AM
Hi Kris,
There's not really a "good" solution. This naming check is done in a standard class (can't remember the name right now, but you should be able to find it through debug pretty quickly). If your "organization" agrees, I guess you can just create an implicit enhancement to skip this check.
We chose to just use different characters.
Cheers,
Bruno