Bridge workflow - unarchive a Resource Management Project?

I can see in the Bridge RM integration options where I can create, get and update an RM project. Also, within the update, I see where I can archive a project. However, I don't see that I can unarchive a project in the Bridge RM integration like I can through the RM user interface.

Is it possible to unarchive an RM project through a Bridge workflow? We are basing this on a status change in a SS. The user could change a status to 'complete', which should archive the project, but could then toggle the status back to 'in progress'. When they do the latter, we would want to unarchive the project so time could start being charged to it again.

Find more posts tagged with

Bridge

Resource Management

Accepted answers

Genevieve P.

Hi @ryanparmenter

I haven't tested this, but what happens if you un-check the "archive" box during the update?

If this doesn't change the archive status, Resource Management has an API end point for updating the archive status of a Project, which means you should be able to build this out using the Bridge HTTP call utility function.

Let me know if that helped!

Cheers,

Genevieve

All comments

Genevieve P.

Hi @ryanparmenter

I haven't tested this, but what happens if you un-check the "archive" box during the update?

Let me know if that helped!

Cheers,

Genevieve

ryanparmenter

Unfortunately, it looks like if you use the out-of-the-box Update Project integration in Bridge, it won't allow you to change anything on an archived project, including trying to unarchive the project by leaving the Archive checkbox unchecked. I did try out the 1000ft API, though, that you suggested. It looks like it will work for me where I can update only the Archive property via the PUT operation in the API. Then, incorporating that into the HTTP utility looks like it will work.

Thanks! I hadn't used the 1000ft API or the HTTP utility in Bridge before, so those are 2 great things to learn. I appreciate your help.

Genevieve P.

Ah, thank you for confirming!

The HTTP utility makes workflows that much more flexible - if you can't find a direct module for what you need, but there's an API out there you can leverage... I'm a big fan of the HTTP utility! 🙂

Sign in to join the conversation!

Quick Links

Component react.discussion.discussions had an error.

ref must be one of: categoryID, siteSectionID, category, category/categoryID, category/name, category/description, category/url, category/allowedDiscussionTypes, locale, siteSection, siteSection/basePath, siteSection/contentLocale, siteSection/sectionGroup, siteSection/sectionID, siteSection/name, siteSection/description, siteSection/apps, siteSection/attributes, layoutViewType, discussionID, commentID, page, sort, discussion, discussion/name, tags, breadcrumbs, discussionApiParams, serverDraftID, serverDraft.