problem wits files

As far as I know, this problem is not solvable without buying PDM software such as Interlink, etc...

Also, Pro-E does not care about the time and date stamp of the file, > we work on pro engineer 2000, we have some files on our inside server; my

For those in some existence before ilink (those who invented it were in such a state), there must be something to build on, for example: what about a directory designated as the revision directory; anything in it was subject to revision and anyone looking for a particular file would check in this directory first to make sure it wasn't already "checked out". Perhaps those who began such sophisticated systems as IntraLink or Pro/PDM or iMAN began with a specific directory and a database to track usage (who had what signed out for revision [class one], evaluation [class two] or simple viewing [class three]), so that the process was somewhat automated with scripts or something. So....... why couldn't something like this be duplicated, with the intervention of human intelligence, as a primitive pdm system, with the consultation and cooperation of a group of intelligent humans (e.g. engineers)!?!

It boils down to an ageed upon directory for revision and a database to track useage/purpose. Everything between this and a full-blown Product Lifecycle Management System is the steps of evolutionary development, requiring, as Edison put it, 90% persperation and 10% inspiration.

David Janes

The problem with moving files among directories again is foiled by Pro-E's version numbering of the files.

If you 'backup' a component, or assembly in Pro-E all of the version numbers get reset back to 1. After your revisions, plus the 'purge' command to clean up all the old files, the revisions of the files left will have to be manually changed to be greater that the revision of the files already stored in the 'released' or 'active' directories.

By having files in several directories, with the version numbers and not the time and date stamps of the files controlling what is the most 'up to date' file, the possibility of coordinating Pro-E files is nearly impossible without PDM.

BTW, "...an agreed upon dierctory for revision and a database to track useage/purpose..." sounds like PDM. :->

In another system I have used, the parts did not have 'version' numbers. MS windows reminds you when you don't have write control of the files. The CAD system would also recursively search up the directory tree for files it couldn't find. This made revision control of assemblies possible without PDM. (and searchpath.pro files)

For example:

Project Widget has assembly 123 with parts abc, def The directory structure looks like this:

d:\ -\Widget -REV0 123.asm abc.prt def.prt

Now you want to make rev A by changing part abc.

Create a directory REVA inside of REV0, and copy part abc and assembly 123

Now the structure looks like this:

d:\ -\Widget -\REV0 123.asm abc.prt def.prt -\REVA 123.asm abc.prt

The system will find part def by looking UP the directory tree until it finds part def or gets to root.

IF part def was changed at rev B the tree look like this:

d:\ -\Widget -\REV0 123.asm abc.prt def.prt -\REVA 123.asm abc.prt -\REVB 123.asm def.prt

It may have not been pretty, but it worked.

Sorry for the long post, but Pro-E really needs three things: 1) get rid of version numbers, 2) Check parts and assemblies recursively to make sure they are regenerated and up to date, 3) Unlimited undo with a 'backup directory' to get out of trouble when trying several iterations.

Right now you have to buy PDM to get this functionality. I hope that as other systems (Solidworks, Solidedge, etc... ) start to incorporate more simple PDM like features for version control and access, PTC will follow suit.

David Janes wrote:

"Chris Gosnell" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com... : The problem with moving files among directories again is foiled by : Pro-E's version numbering of the files. : : If you 'backup' a component, or assembly in Pro-E all of the version : numbers get reset back to 1. After your revisions, plus the 'purge' : command to clean up all the old files, the revisions of the files left : will have to be manually changed to be greater that the revision of the : files already stored in the 'released' or 'active' directories. : : By having files in several directories, with the version numbers and not : the time and date stamps of the files controlling what is the most 'up : to date' file, the possibility of coordinating Pro-E files is nearly : impossible without PDM. : : BTW, "...an agreed upon dierctory for revision and a database to track : useage/purpose..." sounds like PDM. :->

There is a dialog going on here; that's good, so let's review. The Russian dude (Vladi) needed a way to keep design engineers from inadvertently screwing each other (oh, how embarrassing for normally functioning heterosexual males!). You, Chris Gosnell, suggested (quite rightly) that the solution was a PDM/PLM system. I suggested that it might not be all or nothing, PDM or OBLIVION! And that history suggested that there might be partial, less costly measures, i.e. that these people might not have to spend 6 grand to solve their problem. Then you came back with no/yes (my schema was wrong but another schema (sub directories/sub-sub directories/sub-sub-sub directories?) might be possible, something on the way, but not quite to a PDM system. In other words, Chris, you almost, sort of, kind of agreed with me, with reservations and revisions and other academic trash. Is that about right!?! Okay, I accept: subdirectories ~ good suggestion, makes me think ~ hey, why didn't I think of that. Okay, well, my only apology is that I was simply trying to combat the suggestion that you had to be the good consumer (buy IntraLink/PDM) or do NOTHING!!!!!!!!!! Isn't that what you were actually suggesting, Chris? in your intial statement and in your criticism of my proposal? just buy some software or you were hopelessly screwed? Anyway, whatever, there must be something Vladi can do besides just buy a piece of software; possibly using native human intelligence?

: Sorry for the long post, but Pro-E really needs three things: 1) get rid : of version numbers, 2) Check parts and assemblies recursively to make : sure they are regenerated and up to date, 3) Unlimited undo with a : 'backup directory' to get out of trouble when trying several iterations.

Agreed! There is nothing in Pro/e so backward as its 'file management' tools. Yes, dump it all as a Unix hangover, an excresence from the days when Unix made it possible/necessary for everyone to invent their own file management system. I remember the days of Pro/e DBMS: what complete, total, infantile doodrops; silly, at best and totally destructive, suicidal at worst. Utter garbage, along with all the other functions of Pro/GOOFY, like Amatuer/TABLE (laughable as a ShareWare program in the 80s) and slowly, but gratefully fading into the sunset. And, yes, you're right! Competition will either kill them or cure them (once they give up their proprietary silliness {I mean, not that what's wrong with it is stictly that it's proprietary, but that it's being proprietary, as an end in itself [the insane aquisivite/grasping/paranoid/protective insanity] is at the core of it's being junk, but MY junk, protected junk, proprietary cultish medieval exclusive snobbish junk}). Ooooo, how's that for a rant!! But, really, I'd like to see the beast survive, in spite of the cultish stupidity of its gross and foppish whiphandlers (i.e. PTC)

David Janes