More detail in View and Manage Locks

[mikewhit]

[build 738]
Could do with another column in the View and Manage Locks report.

Currently it only seems to show Diagram and Element, whereas the Find dialog shows the detailed element type plus the package, which is more helpful.

Also a Locate Selected would be useful.

[Bruno.Cossi]

Ability to search within the window would be great,  too (at least until such a time when EA will be able to easily show me ehich elements are locked and by whom right in the project view :-) )

Bruno

[skiwi]

+1

[qwerty]

Bit late for a +1 ?

q.

[skiwi]

Bit late for a +1 ?

Never if it didn't happen, the need hasn't gone away, in fact as our models get larger the need grows :-)

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Bit late for a +1?

Never if it didn't happen, the need hasn't gone away, in fact, as our models get larger the need grows :-)

It's the perennial problem of resurrecting potentially "dead" posts.  I err on Skiwi's side and opt to resurrect.

Paolo

[Eve]

Scouring the forum for any post that's a little like your requirement and resurrecting it is just pointless noise.

[Glassboy]

Scouring the forum for any post that's a little like your requirement and resurrecting it is just pointless noise.

+1

[skiwi]

I'm sorry you think that.
The Manage locks dialogue has remained unchanged for as long as I can remember.

To manage locks some simple improvements such as filtering or seaching would go a long way,
and being able to view by Project Browser structure would also be beneficial.

Is what you are you really saying

Scouring the forum for any post that's a little like your requirement and resurrecting it a requirement is just pointless noise.

[Eve]

Not at all.

You appear to have done exactly what I described. Out of 4 resurrected threads, you added to only one.

If you actually had something to contribute that wouldn't be bad. If you created a new thread, summarized what you need and why, linking to the previous threads as supporting documentation it might even look like you were expressing a requirement.

[skiwi]

If you created a new thread, summarized what you need and why, linking to the previous threads as supporting documentation it might even look like you were expressing a requirement.

Well I used to do that, but (channelling other community members) it didn't seem to make any difference, in fact the community took exception to it as measured by my karma!


I accept your point that I didn't actually specify a requirement,
my "+" was in support - a convention that I've seen in this community before - of the original requirement expressed by mikewhit.


Of course in my optimism I imagined that Sparx would read my mind and while they were specifying the requirements would be aware of other posts about managing locks and synthesise a better outcome than any individually expressed here (that's what you do right).


lol

[Eve]

I try not to read anyone's mind.

But yes, any and all requests are likely to go through interpretation which may result in a solution completely different from what was being requested.

[skiwi]

Thank you,
well just to help then

• Manage Locks... dialog usability defect
• Lock Package... dialog usability defect (related)
• Hierararchical Manage Locks for the love of...
• Manage locks
• Manage locks / Security by package

Should I submit a new feature request?

[qwerty]

I guess you could. But probably you could have a nice beer and relax. The last time I saw a useful improvement coming from a FR was about 2005 or so. Don't beat me to that, there might have come a few more even after the marketing took over. But up to that time the improvements came in dozens. Aw, grand dad talking about the war.

q.

[skiwi]

Feature request submitted 
Reference number: 19042016