Loss of OLE Links In MPSe 2007

[paul.burton]

Hi,

I'm using MPSE 2007 all relevant service packs installed.

I have a large programme with multiple layers of management who wish
to track milestones they are accountable for.

We have smaller work package and project teams creating schedules.
These contain consistent milestones cascaded from the customer down
through the programme levels for teams to deliver and work package,
project and programme managers to track.

For corporate reasons we there has been pressure to avoid using master
projects so "summary schedules" have been created for managers to
track milestones. As the work to reach the milestones is done by their
teams, and should be updated in their schedules, it is a waste to
manually update 3 or 4 levels of schedule with the same information,
i.e. "X" milestone 100% complete.

Understanding the issues in dynamic linking of cells between projects
I thought I had got around this by linking tasks using cross project
task links and then OLE linking the "actual finish" cell from the
resulting predecessor "ghost task".

This seems a natural solution as the ghost task creates a line item in
the schedule and should therefore work as an internal OLE link (which
the system seems to manage quite well), and indeed works well.

The problem is that if you then insert the file into a consolidated
project to create more cross project links, or import a file as a
subproject to make these links the "internal" OLE links that have
already been created fail the next time the file is opened. In a
rolling wave environment it is difficult to avoid needing to update
cross project links.

Any advice would be appreciated...

Thanks,

Paul

 

[Ben Howard]

Hi Paul,
Alas no real answers for you. The OLE links can at times be fragile, and I
guess you are seeing a result of that fragility, though in truth I've not
done lots of inserts with other projects and so haven't directly seen your
issues.

The Master (Programme) project functionality actually works very will in
project server 2007, so it might be worth revisiting this to see if you can
use it, especially if the advice given was based on 2003 experience.

 

[paul.burton]

Hi Paul,
Alas no real answers for you.  The OLE links can at times be fragile, and I
guess you are seeing a result of that fragility, though in truth I've not
done lots of inserts with other projects and so haven't directly seen your
issues.

The Master (Programme) project functionality actually works very will in
project server 2007, so it might be worth revisiting this to see if you can
use it, especially if the advice given was based on 2003 experience.  
--
Thanks,  Ben.

Please rate this post if it helped.http://appleparkltd.spaces.live.com/













- Show quoted text -

Ben,

It is a weird problem because you are making no changes to the cross
project links you already have in place (not even opening the file),
and the OLE links remain internal only.

Thanks anyway - I agree master projects are the better way but
attempting to work with the current constraints.

Paul

 

[Gary L. Chefetz]

Paul:

Why can't you simply use real dependency links to build your summary
project? OLE links are fragile and not worth the headache.

--
----------
Gary L. Chefetz, MVP
MSProjectExperts
Project Server Consulting: http://www.msprojectexperts.com
Project Server Training: http://www.projectservertraining.com
Project Server FAQS: http://www.projectserverexperts.com
Project Server Help Blog: http://www.projectserverhelp.com

Hi Paul,
Alas no real answers for you. The OLE links can at times be fragile, and I
guess you are seeing a result of that fragility, though in truth I've not
done lots of inserts with other projects and so haven't directly seen your
issues.

The Master (Programme) project functionality actually works very will in
project server 2007, so it might be worth revisiting this to see if you
can
use it, especially if the advice given was based on 2003 experience.
--
Thanks, Ben.

Please rate this post if it helped.http://appleparkltd.spaces.live.com/













- Show quoted text -

Ben,

It is a weird problem because you are making no changes to the cross
project links you already have in place (not even opening the file),
and the OLE links remain internal only.

Thanks anyway - I agree master projects are the better way but
attempting to work with the current constraints.

Paul

 

[paul.burton]

Paul:

Why can't you simply use real dependency links to build your summary
project? OLE links are fragile and not worth the headache.

--
----------
Gary L. Chefetz, MVP
MSProjectExperts
Project Server Consulting:http://www.msprojectexperts.com
Project Server Training:http://www.projectservertraining.com
Project Server FAQS:http://www.projectserverexperts.com
Project Server Help Blog:http://www.projectserverhelp.com








Ben,

It is a weird problem because you are making no changes to the cross
project links you already have in place (not even opening the file),
and the OLE links remain internal only.

Thanks anyway - I agree master projects are the better way but
attempting to work with the current constraints.

Paul- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Gary,

Can you explain what you mean by "real dependency links". Are you
suggesting a schedule that only contains the resultant ghost tasks?
One task with many predecessors?

As mentioned I am using cross schedule task links and OLE pasting the
actual finish dates from the resultant ghost tasks. To be clear I am
not pasting OLE links between files. These "internal" OLE links work
perfectly (not fragile) until you use a consolidated project for some
reason. For info, this also happens with any hammock tasks, that are
completely internal to the file, when sub projects are inserted or
consolidated files are used. I also noticed that paste linking is
randomly not possible when in a consolidated project. I get the
feeling that this is not peculiar to our instance.

My goal is maximum automation - if someone has already typed it, why
type it again? Dissappointed because I thought I had worked around the
OLE bug, I cannot see any reason why using a consoildated project for
maintenance operations such as linking should cause any issues. The
final workaround is to only do cross project links using the "old
method" of typing in the filename/taskname of the external predecessor
into the predecessors tab in task information (not as convenient).
This does not cause any failure of any internal OLE links.

BTW I have the "Managing Enterprise Projects" book - any chance of a
pocket sized edition?

Thanks,

Paul

 

[Gary L. Chefetz]

Paul:

I agree that typing in the link is boring, that is why temporary master
projects are so convenient to use for this purpose.

--
----------
Gary L. Chefetz, MVP
MSProjectExperts
Project Server Consulting: http://www.msprojectexperts.com
Project Server Training: http://www.projectservertraining.com
Project Server FAQS: http://www.projectserverexperts.com
Project Server Help Blog: http://www.projectserverhelp.com

Paul:

Why can't you simply use real dependency links to build your summary
project? OLE links are fragile and not worth the headache.

--
----------
Gary L. Chefetz, MVP
MSProjectExperts
Project Server Consulting:http://www.msprojectexperts.com
Project Server Training:http://www.projectservertraining.com
Project Server FAQS:http://www.projectserverexperts.com
Project Server Help Blog:http://www.projectserverhelp.com








Ben,

It is a weird problem because you are making no changes to the cross
project links you already have in place (not even opening the file),
and the OLE links remain internal only.

Thanks anyway - I agree master projects are the better way but
attempting to work with the current constraints.

Paul- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Gary,

Can you explain what you mean by "real dependency links". Are you
suggesting a schedule that only contains the resultant ghost tasks?
One task with many predecessors?

As mentioned I am using cross schedule task links and OLE pasting the
actual finish dates from the resultant ghost tasks. To be clear I am
not pasting OLE links between files. These "internal" OLE links work
perfectly (not fragile) until you use a consolidated project for some
reason. For info, this also happens with any hammock tasks, that are
completely internal to the file, when sub projects are inserted or
consolidated files are used. I also noticed that paste linking is
randomly not possible when in a consolidated project. I get the
feeling that this is not peculiar to our instance.

My goal is maximum automation - if someone has already typed it, why
type it again? Dissappointed because I thought I had worked around the
OLE bug, I cannot see any reason why using a consoildated project for
maintenance operations such as linking should cause any issues. The
final workaround is to only do cross project links using the "old
method" of typing in the filename/taskname of the external predecessor
into the predecessors tab in task information (not as convenient).
This does not cause any failure of any internal OLE links.

BTW I have the "Managing Enterprise Projects" book - any chance of a
pocket sized edition?

Thanks,

Paul