Author Topic: Version and Phase moved to model settings  (Read 5413 times)

Krzysztof Swiatkowski

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Understanding is a three-edged sword
    • View Profile
Version and Phase moved to model settings
« on: June 08, 2008, 07:17:35 am »
Please move options Version and Phase (Tools>Options>Objects) to be model based not user based. Right now whenever I switch projects I need to remember to set corect values again and again.  If those were saved for a project instead of user I would not need to keep right versions and phases in other document they would always be in place.

It would also be a nice thing to have an option to allow for friendly behaviour of these values: (e.g Set Version and Phase on modify). I expect it would change Version and Phase values to current for the project whenever significant element properties are modified.

Regards
Kris
If I put you finger in the eye
then you have finger in the eye
and I have finger in the eye
but it's not the same

Martin Terreni

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 672
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Sorry, I can't write
    • View Profile
Re: Version and Phase moved to model settings
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2008, 04:07:30 pm »
You haev my vote for this. good idea.
Recursion definition:
If you don’t understand the definition read "Recursion definition".

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Version and Phase moved to model settings
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2008, 09:57:06 pm »
Actually, I'd prefer them to be in both places. Although version might be more constant, phase could be subject to some 'jitter' between users and sessions.

Consider that both of these values can be used for any purpose, neither is constrained by (specified) convention or function. We could have one 'role' working on phase (i.e. piece) A of a project, while another role (perhaps even the same user under a different hat) working on phase B.

This is a bit less likely with version numbers. [I am being a bit guarded here. Given that we are 'allowed' to use these numbers as we see fit I want to allow for those organizations who might choose an 'unconventional convention' here. I am not in any way suggesting this be done.]

So what I'd like to see is a project-level setting. [Yes, absolutely!] This could be set as the EA default, perhaps even propagating to new projects (although I'd prefer that to be set by the seed project we use).

There should also be a per-user setting, that would override the project-level one. This might be set on a per-project basis. There is a (perhaps limited) precedent for this. Check out the default diagram setting. If user security is turned on then each user can override the 'default default' diagram without changing the setting for others.

David
No, you can't have it!

Martin Terreni

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 672
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Sorry, I can't write
    • View Profile
Re: Version and Phase moved to model settings
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2008, 04:38:42 am »
Right...
Recursion definition:
If you don’t understand the definition read "Recursion definition".

Jan ´Bary´ Glas

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Bary
    • View Profile
Re: Version and Phase moved to model settings
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2008, 04:37:53 pm »
Yes, David, you are true again. And I will need it for my project in one month. Any chance? ;)
Jan 'Bary' Glas

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Version and Phase moved to model settings
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2008, 08:54:51 pm »
My guess is that this would be relatively simple - whichever way Sparx might decide to do it. Whether they choose to do so is another thing, and I have no more influence than you.

I strongly suggest (no pun intended) that you make the feature request, as soon as possible - in case there might be two builds released before this becomes critical for you; that would double the chance of success if Sparx picks up on this.

Go through the formal channel via the link at the bottom of the page. Include a link to this thread, in case Sparx can provide us with a workaround in the meantime.

Please let us know - as always - if you hear anything relevant from Sparx. I'd like to see this too. This is one of those things that can be handled through an add-in, but doing so creates almost as much nuisance as it relieves.

David
No, you can't have it!