As of now, Assets can be either Per Robot or available to all (processes / robots). I think it will be very useful to have Per Process assets as well. Most of the assets we create are specific to process. Rarely assets are generic (i…e. available to all) or Robots specific.
- Proper controls over assets. This ensures no one else over-writes / uses assets by mistake
- Release management becomes easy: i.e. Developer can export process (package, assets and any other process specific objects (like queues, schedules)), and support team can simply import this.
- With CI / CD, we would want ability to move process from Development environment to UAT environment to Production environment. With CI / CD, above mentioned proper controls over assets will help easily moving Process (Package & assets) to new environment
I was just having a similar discussion with my RPA co-workers today… I was thinking a slightly different implementation, but same basic concept. I was thinking that there should be “global” assets and process-specific attributes, or assets that are children or sub-assets of other assets and can be displayed and managed in tree form - something to make management of assets easier as the list of processes and assets grows.
yeah, i think that’s good idea
This would also allow “reuse” of assets based on process, which minimizes the number of “asset names” you have to create. Instead of having to define a “Process1Queue”, “Process2Queue” and “Process3Queue” asset for 3 processes, All 3 processes could simply use a “Queue” asset, which would return 3 different values based on process.
Yes, yes, the more I think about your idea, the more I like it! Simplifies setup, maintenance and administration of assets!
Was just working on a Project today when I realized, Boy! wouldn’t it be nice/great if I could only create Assets at the Process Level (Not Robot level). Or, if maybe some kind of Global Dictionary could be defined at the Automation (Project) level, which would then be easy to copy & re-use across different automation. Given Projects are “published” to Orchestrator, then this Global Dictionary (Assets0 could be associated to the automation…maybe at the Version level given that values could changes or be added/subtract based on the version of the automation.
We usually have a naming strategy to resolve this. All the process are named sequentially. Example -001-process1,002-process2. And the assets could also use the naming 001,002 that will identify which process it belongs to