Imagine this: you create a task in MSProject that requires action from a task owner. You click the Link to Planner button and go through the linking process (https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/brismith/2017/08/29/microsoft-planner-linking-plans-to-a-project-task/#comment-48795). But instead of just being a link to the Planner plan, you actually see the task as a card on the plan, with Task Name, Start Date, Finish Date, and Resources all being pulled from MSProject to Planner. And you can add more tasks from MSProject to Planner, each as its own card. You then add this plan to a tab on Teams, and people can go from the plan to the document they're tasked to work on and back to the plan to mark their task complete, which then pushes back to MSProject as a completed task.

Wouldn't that be awesome?!

Presently, there are 2 tabs/pages for a project to log both Risks & Issues. However, there is no feature to convert an existing Risk to Issue which happen most of the times.

When this is available as a feature it becomes easier to see the trail from Risk to Issue and the mitigation's which taken/not taken which caused this risk to convert to an issue.

When this conversion happens the risk should be closed referring to the Issue ID so it also becomes intuitive for the users and will definitely help the project managers and the project teams to manage risks and issues more effectively.

Is there is a supported way for Microsoft partners to read local custom fields residing in Project Online? What appears to be the case is that CSOM is supported for Project Online, but PSI is not. Furthermore PSI gives access to local custom fields but CSOM does not. Thus there is no supported solution that allows read access to local custom fields in Project Online. I hope I am missing something here. It would be great to know if I am wrong or if there is a workaround. Failing that, it would be great to get an enlargement of CSOM to provide access to local custom fields. Please see attached summary of the MSDN documentation that leads to my suggestion here.

Jim

I would really appreciate a response to this request because I have customers who my company's applications to be able to read their project data from Project Online

In the Middle East, we can't show the Hijri Date in Project Center (Project Server 2010/2013/2016 with Arabic Language Pack) for the following:

1. Start Date, End Date, End Date and custom field with date type in PDP.
2. Timeline Date.
3. Gantt chart.
4. Views

If we changed the calendar regional setting in site setting, and go back to Project Center We got the below error:

"Sorry, something went wrong
This feature requires either a Gregorian calendar or a calendar that uses a Gregorian recurrence pattern.

Make sure your calendar is correctly set in:
https://mqassas.sa/_layouts/15/regionalsetng.aspx?Type=User

Also, check with your administrator to update the calendar in:
https://mqassas.sa/_layouts/15/regionalsetng.aspx

Unfortunately, it's not acceptable from our Arab clients, they want to show their Project List in Project Center with Hijri Date.

Does it make sense that a big product like Project Server didn't support Hijri Date?! Usually, we hear this sentence alot and we totally agree!

By the way, we can display the Hijri Date via Microsoft project but it's not an acceptable workaround, the customer wants to show his project list in Project Center with Hijri Date without opening each project one by one.

We can also customize custom reports via SSRS or whatever, but in this case, what's the value of Project Center with the customer who needs to use Hijri Date and Arabic MUI in Project Server.

I think this feature is very important to all Microsoft Arab customers around the world. We wish to be applied soon.

I think that the Resource Capacity/Engagement Heatmap is an enormously useful feature – I’ve built very similar reports for my customers in the past.

However, the current iteration of this report only shows capacity that is accounted for by engagements, and doesn’t account for any assignments that do not have proposed or committed engagements.

I think that enhancing this page to include information concerning assignments without corresponding engagements would be extremely valuable in two primary scenarios:
1) Identifying cases where resource capacity is being consumed outside of an engagement within the heatmap UX, especially considering that the stated intent of the engagements feature is not to block the PjM from making assignments without a committed engagement

2) Providing value to users migrating into 2016 who, for whatever reason, are not going to go back and create historical engagements or engagements for existing/future work that is already scheduled