Air Manager 3.6 Beta release#1 request

[SimPassion]

Before the AM 3.6 Beta initial release,
we really need inside AM, a protection mode, for all instruments we manage and already submitted, this for not marked as Personal, as equally for those marked as Personal,
that we don't want to see erased or overwritten, with the incoming AM release or with some other manually updated instruments in the Online Store

this to prevent any potential issue on dev side

Regards
Gilles

[Ralph]

You can increase the version number. For example you submit an instrument with version 109, then increase it to for example 115. But maybe 'Personal' instruments shouldn't update? I think that is what you suggested?

[SimPassion]

I just need to enable a check box saying no overwrite allowed : no matter it's not marked as "Personal" or already marked as "Personal"

Other solution : when it come to download : the process shouldn't "force erase mandatory" any existing instrument/panel with the same UUID but ask the user to overwrite or not
As a reminder for future release on Download process, to be able to select a set of instruments to download : either one, either a few, either all

In any case to be able to do a mass selective overwrite or one by one

Gilles

[Corjan]

Hi,

I will add a warning bar to AM 3.6. Saying you should clone the instrument it you don't want to take the risk of your work getting overwritten.
There is no good solution for this, since it would require a code merge.

Changing the version works, but it more like a workaround.

Corjan

[SimPassion]

I understand if nothing can be done for this,
for different reasons, as the workload or the feasability

but for me a warning is not enough,
if we say a message, it should rather be at minima a check of already existing instrument and if prefered then a warning

but from far if anything else couldn't be achieved : the most important "not doing an instrument erase inside folders without customer acknowledgment"
the instrument could have been reworked for some reason and the work on user side should never be overwritten
AM can't know, as I understand, if something has already been updated and plus can't know what the user want

Gilles

[Sling]

If the version control is working nicely for personal and non personal then doesn’t setting the version to 999 achieve the same result as a do not overwrite tick box?

As long as the version control is working as we think then I think this gives the protection required.

Perhaps some more information on the use of versions and urging users to clone rather than change existing instruments is required.

Tony

[SimPassion]

Once again I don't requesting for advisory but for mechanism that we can rely on
I don't think of going on each instrument one by one, increasing the version number

because what occurs when we, two time, are loosing all already downloaded instruments when a new release was there ?
The process itself for downlading more than 500 instrument and cliking on each individual "Download" button is something rather long to do each time and that we can prevent for us to wasting time

all these things that could include a waste of time in the computing ...

Gilles

[Sling]

Why would you need to go through every instrument one by one. Surely the process is simply changing the version number on an instrument when you start to edit that instrument.

This should only affect your own instruments that you have submitted and want to maintain the same UUID. All the others are not yours to control and update and in that case if you did want a modified version of someone else’s online instrument then the process would be to clone it before modification so it has a unique UUID.

It seems simple and adequate to me but perhaps i’m missing something.

Tony

[SimPassion]

Why would you need to go through every instrument one by one. Surely the process is simply changing the version number on an instrument when you start to edit that instrument.

This should only affect your own instruments that you have submitted and want to maintain the same UUID. All the others are not yours to control and update and in that case if you did want a modified version of someone else’s online instrument then the process would be to clone it before modification so it has a unique UUID.

It seems simple and adequate to me but perhaps i’m missing something.

Tony

As I already said in my previous post and why I was starting this thread is :

"...because what occurs when we, two times, are loosing all already downloaded instruments when a new release was there ?..."

I really had to redownload each instrument one by one because they where erased
I wish to avoid to redo the whole process of downloading each instrument one by one with clicking more than 500 times on a download button
and indeed if I haven't made a backup of my own submitted instruments having a precise and particular UUID but not marked as Personal, I would have more than loosing my time

So, I can't say otherwise and would really ensure something will be done to prevent such situation

Gilles

[Sling]

Gilles,

I'm trying to understand this issue but i'm struggling with the information i have so far. Please educate me.

Is this issue only related to a new AM release or does it also happen with general instrument updates? I was thinking all along that you were talking about instrument updates but I think now you are referring to when AM itself updates.

Why do you have to manually download an instrument that is updated. I thought the process when an update was pushed out, was that if you have an older version on your system it gets replaced automatically by the newer version. Are you saying this is not the case?

When you say the instruments are erased, I think you are also saying they are not replaced by a newer version. So you are left with nothing. If that is true, I agree we definitely don't want that.

From what you seem to be saying you had every online instrument (500+) loaded onto your system and lost then all on two occasions when a new version of AM was released.

Tony