Auto Assign and Update Item during CAD file Check In

[scottmoyse]

It would be nice if you could auto-assign and/or update Items when the CAD file is checked in. At this point in my thought process, this would only need to be a global setting. Maybe some options for enabling or disabling certain CAD applications and file types would be handy.

Supporting iParts & iAssemblies in Inventor would be handy as well. But not so important, due to the frequency with which that would need to happen being much lower.

[steveh3]

Think this would have to be a user based checkbox rather than a global. Would like to see it next to the dwf creation check box on the Check-In add-in for Inventor rather than an admin setting.

On large assemblies, wouldn't want the item to update everytime. In our case would take forever.

If I may would like to add to the wish.....would like to have the ability to choose which change order the item would attach to on auto-create also.

[joel.kolodziej]

Our organization are new users of vault, and we are finding a lot of things which we feel should be done automatically which require manual intervention.  Some are already covered by other suggested ideas (Automatic update of properties on checkout in inventor, for example).  But one we have found is that Items always require a manual update as part of our workflow.  We would like to see items get updated automatically (if they exist) after a file checkin.  Logic being->If item exists, update it, otherwise do nothing.  This will prevent items being created when they are not ready, but also ensure that the item records are always up to date with their associated files. This would be an optional behavior, as I am sure some workflows would not benefit from this change.  I see this request has been merged into a much older one (7 years old!), with status changed to future consideration.  Any chance of seeing this before another 7 years?

[joel.kolodziej]

Forgot to mention, that this would be an optional behavior, as I am sure some workflows would not benefit from this change.

[steveh3]

I tried to add 100 votes, but looks like it will just be a Future consideration, as long Younes doesn't UN-Consider it?

Just kidding Younes. 🙂

[steveh3]

BTW...it's still on my wish list!!!!!

Need to probably be off by default, but user what have the option to toggle it on when checking a file in IMHO.

Best,

[tschaeferZNBXX]

Would love to have the option in the Vault to allow users to do this in the Vault add-in as an option possibly set by the Vault Admin.  Just brought this up several times last week at AU with different people so hopefully we can get this in soon.

[scottmoyse]

@YounesYammouri this came up again on site today. Very frustrating.

[uffe-bak]

Voted.
We too see this as a huge wish - and will repeat at next opportunity (so now you are warned 😉 )
We see the trigger to be the state change to For Review or Released, rather than at first check In - to avoid committing too many reduce at a too early state. So a general option on the Actions Tab in Change State is probably the right location, and please do see if it can be outsourced to server/job processor/other Data processing source, to avoid locking Workstation for hours.
Regards Uffe Bak 

[scottmoyse]

Having it happen on state change means having File lifecycles as well as Item lifecycles. Which generally isn't recommended outside of some very specific and well controlled scenarios.

[uffe-bak]

@scottmoyse - Agree that it have to be set up and done VERY carefully!
In our case Engineering will be responsible for creation of Engineering Data, Release and handover to create and transfer (but not Release) Items and BOMs to downstream teams working in ERP, for populating additional manufacturing, purchase and stock info info through a Governance Process - before Final Item/BOM Release.
Later there might come Change Orders in the opposite direction, where Items AND Documents will be revised, finishing a with a re-release of both (by separate entities) as part of closing the Change Order.

We see this as the most efficient method, where linked data have different owners. 

[HenkdeB]

Original idea 10 years ago and Accepted 8 years ago.

Why isn't this available?