Yes sir I have added this
<AttrValue id="MBA|versionInfo" algorithm="com.ptc.core.foundation.vc.server.impl.VersionInfoGenerator">
<Arg>wt.series.HarvardSeries.StateBased</Arg>
</AttrValue>
coding for OIR.
What else need to be done to get the versioning schema?
Thanking you,
Regards,
Chandrakant.
If you are not familiar with query builder, I suggest you to join this group Reporting and to read carefully this document Resource for reporting, particularly this two attached presentations.
https://www.ptcusercommunity.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/6348-83-73173/_Reporting6.2.pptx
To achieve your result you could start from this report https://support.ptc.com/appserver/cs/view/case_solution.jsp?n=CS167918 but you have to change your sub select.
Actualy I found the right parametr to filter the active projects and deleted projects in a report.
Project (wt.projmgmt.admin.Project2).Persist Info.Mark For Delete
In this parametr is the information of deleted or not deleted project.
Valute 0 are Not deleted projects
Valute < 0 are pernametly deleted projects with content
Valute > 0 are deleted projects without content
I think this is very usefull information for creatin the reports agains not deleted projects.
Best Regards.
Been through all that and I get the proper warnings and they are all answered correctly. Just then stops...
It looks like at least one other customer has a similar complaint for Windchill 10.1 M040 (which we're on). We're planning on moving to Windchill 11 later this year so we'll make sure to test the 'Send to PDM' functionality to see if it got fixed.
Not sure whether you already tried this, delete AppData\LocalLow\.wt\priv.ser and try again.
Yes, I think I saw that but wasn't sure how well auto-numbering correlated to auto-naming, since they can be managed so differently. I was also referring to the fact that setting the location clears previously entered values -- which is a massive inconvenience. It's something that will happen in some action windows when you change the table view (for example, I know this is an issue in the "New Multiple Documents" window), but I hadn't heard of it happening after setting a value.
Yes, hopefully moving to 11 will fix these issues. However, even in the latest release, there does not appear to be a way to set a default location -- but you can select the entire table of objects and set the location for all at once, so like you said it's a minor inconvenience compared to the rest.
Hi Daivd,
Did you get the solution as per your expectations for the mentioned issue.
Did you configure two web servers to work with your Windchill for either kind of access?
--
Dharmendra Patel
Thanks for posting this. I had forgotten about those checkboxes and that functionality.
Since you found the solution for this problem ... does that mean it also resolves your other one over here?: Re: RE: 10.1 Workflow Exceptions now show exception log etc - I don't want this
Yes Ben
the other problem is solved as well.
I have been trying to do something similar to this. Our business process depends on the output of STEP and parasolid files from our model files. I am trying to make them more accessible by putting them into their own WTDocument during the publish phase. I have written the following publishing rule xml. The file passes validation and loads into the WC system. On publish it is creating the Step and Parasolid and attaching them as representations. Id does not seem to be performing the post-publishing operations and creating the WTDocument. I am not seeing any error/log information of failure. Could someone please look at the XML and see if I am missing a trigger statement somewhere? Thank you.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rules xmlns="http://www.ptc.com"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.ptc.com PublishRulesSchema.xsd"
evaluate-rules-on-republish="true">
<authoring-application name="SOLIDWORKS">
<additional-files name="standard_files">
<!-- only default='true' files will be generated at this time -->
<file display-label="STEP" type="step" default="true" output-prefix="step" />
<file display-label="PARASOLID" type="Parasolid" default="true" output-prefix="Parasolid" />
</additional-files>
<param-set name="Share with WTDocument">
<post-publish name="delegate">com.ptc.wvs.server.publish.AdditionalFilesPostPublishDelegate</post-publish>
<post-publish name="name">{ADDITIONAL_FILE_PRIMARY_EXTENSION}_FOR_{EPM_NAME}</post-publish>
<post-publish name="folder">/Design</post-publish>
<post-publish name="type">com.mtc.MCADAdditionalFiles</post-publish>
<post-publish name="number">{EPM_NUMBER}-{ADDITIONAL_FILE_PRIMARY_EXTENSION}</post-publish>
</param-set>
<publish on="checkin" display-label="Additional Files" additional-files="standard_files" param-set="Share with WTDocument"/>
<publish on="create-representation" display-label="Additional Files" additional-files="standard_files" param-set="Share with WTDocument"/>
<publish on="schedule" display-label="Additional Files" additional-files="standard_files" param-set="Share with WTDocument"/>
</authoring-application>
</rules>
UPDATE:
I added a manual option to run the post publish and I am seeing an error that says
| Post Publishing Succeeded with Warnings | |
|---|---|
| Warning: No additional files match the regular expression in the post publish parameter set | |
You might try removing the "param-set" piece and just verify that the additional files are generated correctly (and attached to the primary representation.) Once you're sure that's working you can fix the post-publish delegate.
Čeština pro Windchill není k dispozici OOTB, ale je dodávána dodatečným CZ balíčkem jak pro Windchill tak pro Creo.
The Czech language is not available in OOTB instalation. The Czech language is implemented by additional CZ Pack for Windchill and Creo.
Best Regards.
sorry should have been more clear. I started from that direction and the files are being created. Even with the above code I can go to the view you depict in your image and I see the relevant files. Then I click Post Publish and get the error.
We put all our engineering project documents in PDMLink and the majority stay at In Work. However, there are a few of the documents that our group leaders manually sets the state to Approved. They are analysis reports. The reason we do this is so people outside of engineering can see them. The group leader knows to set the state when the engineer sends them an email. The problem is many times the group leader forgets to set the state of these documents.
We have workflows set up for our CR's/CN's but not for documents.
I am wondering if anyone else does something like this and if so how they handle it. I know we could create workflows but we would have to get our partner company to create them. I'm not saying we won't do that but I am looking for a better and simpler (less expensive) option.
Can use the OTB Promotion process for this w/no coding or workflow development. Just have to populate the Promotion Approver Role.
Only two of the param-set values are required, "delegate" and "name". Maybe try removing the others just for testing purposes.
Unfortunately we already use it for some CAD files.
Still the same result. I think I might need to open a case with PTC and see if this is a bug. FYI I am working on 11.0 M010
Look at the following example of a document created in Windchill PDMLink:
Looking at the history view at the bottom of the above image, a document was created by "User 1" on 2015-09-17 13:51 EDT at version A.1. It went through a series of changes. On 2016-05-06 09:23 EDT, a change administrator (User 2) revised the object as part of an ECN to make version C.1. Then the document was checked out and changed, and checked back in once again on 2016-07-26 11:31 EDT by User 1 and then the document was released again.
If you look at the details view for the current version (C.2), it lists the "Created By" user as User 2, on the date when C.1 was created. This is not intuitive to the users, and we prefer to see the date of the A.1 version and the individual who created that version.
Is there a way to get "Created By" and "Created On" to reflect that?