Option to Fix Timeline Steps That Are No Longer Needed

[changjun.z]

Hi,

Usually, after editing in the timeline, some later steps may show warnings or errors that can be fixed by editing, such as redefining a profile or relinking a projection.

However, in some cases, those warning steps are no longer needed at all. They effectively don’t exist anymore. For such steps, you can’t fix them by editing, because there’s nothing valid to edit. For example, if an extrusion is no longer needed and shows a yellow warning, editing it will bring up the extrusion dialog for redefinition. But since the extrusion itself is no longer relevant, you can’t redefine a valid profile and click OK to resolve it (as shown in the image).

In such cases, the only option is to delete the step. But before deleting, you must manually and carefully edit all future steps that depend on it. This is more difficult to do, because those dependent steps may show no warning or error at all, so you have no clue or hints. They appear fine, since the step being deleted had no effective output, but logically they still rely on it.

I hope Fusion can provide an option to fix such steps, similar to the current “edit to fix” method, like "skip" or "soft delete" that auto rebase dependent steps, without forcing us to hard delete and manually redo all dependent steps.

CJ

[dsouzasujay · Accepted solution]

Hi @changjun.z ,

Thank you for bringing this up. Your feedback brings up a valuable point regarding the handling of timeline steps that are no longer needed.

In scenarios where certain steps in the timeline become irrelevant and cannot be edited or fixed, it can indeed pose a challenge. Your suggestion for an option to "skip" or "soft delete" these steps while automatically rebasing dependent steps sounds like it could enhance the usability and efficiency of the Fusion experience.

In the meantime, you might want to consider using "Direct modeling" instead of parametric modeling for such cases. Direct modeling can offer more flexibility and may involve less complexity when dealing with such issues.

I will pass on your suggestion to the development team for consideration. Thank you again for sharing your insights.

[Drewpan]

Hi,

Using the timeline to go back in time should be used to fix minor errors and

not actually change the design so it breaks. While I know that this is not always

possible it should be a consideration when deciding to actually go back in time.

Sometimes it is better to make a design "modular" in that if a part doesn't work

for some reason, instead of trying to "fix" it in the timeline it is better to go

back in time and make a copy of the body, make changes to the Copy. That way

the original still exists and it will not break the timeline when you roll it back.

Since it is a "modular" design you then rebuild the design you were working on

with the modified copy. You will end up duplicating some work but your design

file will be more robust. If there are operations that are not required anymore

then you simply ignore them in the re-build.

This is also helpful down the track because if you open the file six months later

then it is easy to see what did or didn't work, which may be important at that later

time. Everybody makes mistakes and sometimes you have to start a part or the

whole project again. If you can see where you went wrong because all of the

original information is there instead of hiding it by modifying the timeline it can

save much more time and effort in the long run.

Cheers

Andrew

[changjun.z]

Thanks for your reply and for considering making changes.

As you suggested this can be avoided with a better planned workflow, fixed directly, or handled in another way. I didn’t think of it as a bug or broken. Like you said, more like something that could improve usability and give a more consistent user experience when working with the timeline.