"Move to Production" Wording Confusion
I think it may be better to change this wording from "Move to Production" to something like "Publish Process" or something similar.
The use of the word "production" has, in my companies case, caused a lot of confusion when discussing the process of how a bot, or process, goes from being designed, set for review, and eventually moved into "production".
We end up having to explain to user/managers/execs that no, this QA environment will not be putting this process into our production environment. Even after we explain it, the confusion remains.
As another customer user, as yourself, I am trying to understand how your environment is setup, where the terminology is confusing for your company,
The typical Processrobot setup is to have a Solobot(s) on your QA Server(s) and another Solobot(s) on your Production Server(s). Move to production then replaces the production version that will then run on Production Solobot when scheduled/triggered and thus "move to production" is process of moving to production.
... Are you saying that in your company you have 2 separate Processrobot installations ? One Processrobot installation in your QA environment and another Processrobot installation in your Production environment and then your are "Manually" - Exporting / Importing the processes .prp files from the QA Processrobot environment to the Production ProcessRobot environment ?
Thank you for your recommendation.
Let me have this passed on as a feature request to our product team, who will evaluate and prioritize the request accordingly.
1 person likes this
Yes. Our Process Robot environment falls under SOX requirements, hence the need for two separate environments.
Christos, thanks for passing it on :)