Standard Change Templates not being publised on approval

[EricG]

I'm not sure what I'm missing here.  I have an issue where Approved Standard change templates keep having there updated date/by fields update when ever someone completes a new Standard Change using that template.  But if i add a reference in the published_ref field, the updated date/by remains the same.

KB0787919 - states that reverting the (Generate Template On Approval) br to OOB will fix the issue and Publish the item.

I've verified that we didn't update the business rule.

When I compare this to my developer instance, the BR's are exactly he same as well.

I've also verified in both environments, that when I create a Standard Change using the any template but Updated Date and By are showing my name and the date/time i closed the change. And when the change templates published_ref field is not blank, both fields remain the same as when approved.

Any Reason why this would happen?

[GB14]

the error can be on the browser side or one of the scheduled jobs. 

I am attaching the OOB workflow here and you can compare it.  

[EricG]

I've tried to compare and didn't see a difference.

I've also retested, and I'm not sure why i thought Publishing the  Catalog Item solved the issue, but it did not.

So now back to the original why, when you use an approved Standard Change Template that the updated by and updated date get changed to the same info that the Standard Change gets closed.

Example
Template a was created by Joe Smith on 1/##/2019

I create Standard Change CHG123 from Template a and close it on 3/##/2022.

Template a now shows updated by me on 3/##/2022.

[GB14]

Hello Eric,

I checked the list view on our production instance & can confirm the published item is (empty)

To check when the actual template was updated, go to the template and then check the "proposals" tab (related list)

Updated by will change same as workflow, when a change is created from the template, it will show the last updated date as the day it was used. 

Thanks,
G

[EricG]

OK, that's very confusing.  But i think i get it.

I wonder why they didn't have a "Last Used" field to avoid this.

[GB14 · Accepted solution]

I am glad it cleared your concerns, but unfortunately, I cannot answer the whole scenario behind this vs using "Last Used" field to keep it simple 🙂
You can create a custom field tho if it's required. 

Thanks,
G