I am currently facing the situation that a role which is working perfectly for us using the ALM client, fails in Webrunner.
To make it work in Webrunner as it does for the ALM client would require me to give additional rights which I do not want to do.
It would be great if you could create a setup which allows roles which work with a certain rights and roles setup for one of the two approaches (Webrunner / ALM Client) to work for the other approach, too. Alternatively a way to seperate the roles e.g. have one only for Webrunner and one only for ALM Client would work, too.
What is not working for me is a role working in the client and then failing in the webrunner or running in Webrunner with additional rights, which I cannot give in the ALM Client.
Thank you and best regards
PS: Please check on: SD00443121 for Details
could you check on: QC-ALM | SD0044312. It feels to me like the solution I am getting is basically the two are not aligned and that the way it is.
I have a bit of an issue with this. Seems it is not considered a bug and as it is not a bug and I would like to have it, I bring it up in the New Idea section.
This sounds like an unexpected behavior; please ask your support to escalate your case to R&D so that we can investigate further with you.