Make project.pj invisible in the tree display?

[uhahn]

Hi all,

I would like to have a view of the project tree similar to e.g. Windows Explorer.

There should no project.pj files be visible.

Is it possible to suppress the display of "\project.pj" ?

Best regards,

Uwe

[MichaelChatel]

Hi Uwe.

What version of Integrity are you running right now?  Starting in Integrity 10.6, there are various methods that can help accomplish this.  I'd suggest you may want to open a Support case, to address this.

Just an FYI, as of Integrity 10.8 project.pj files no longer exist at all, and the metadata contained in them has been moved into a client-side database. So this would be a non-issue for you on 10.8.

[uhahn]

Hi Michael,

it is 10.5 and there is no chance to get the latest version very quick - I am in a big company ...

Thank you!

Uwe

[MichaelChatel]

Ahh.  In Integrity 10.5 there are no options to hide the project.pj files, in the manner you describe. 

[tketz]

Hi,

thats not fully correct.

In 10.8 you have no project.pj files in windows explorer because of the ClientDB, thats right.

But when I understood Uwe correct, than he wants to hide the "/project.pj" Information in the Project View inside the Integrity Client.

And thats also not possible with 10.8....

[MichaelChatel]

That could be what he's referring to, depending on which view he's referencing.

Again, I'd suggest he likely would want to open a Support case for this.  It's possible he's looking for Integrity Configuration Management projects to be totally transparent to the user (ex. as a user, why am I interested in project.pj?) - and if so, that would be an enhancement RFC that we can associate an organization with, for future consideration.

[LLawton]

Michael, can you clarify what you meant by "Starting in Integrity 10.6, there are various methods that can help accomplish this."

The "this" would be what Uwe is asking, which is to hide the pj files from the Projects (or even Sandboxes) view.

This is something I've wanted for a long time too, to have project names be real names and not file names. For example, "/Projects/Project 1" and not "/Projects/Project 1/project.pj". The pj file is just noise.

If it's true that in 10.8 we don't have pj files but we still show them in the Project view, then isn't that a defect and then it should be corrected.

[MichaelChatel]

I think I misunderstood Uwe's original post.  I was thinking the project.pj file, in the sandbox folder (filesystem).  He may be referring to the visible reference to it, in the various client views.

[uhahn]

Hi guys,

I don't quite understand the discussion. The idea is really simple, e.g. a Music database:

Interpret 1

  Album 1

  Album 2

  Album 3

Interpret 2

  Album 1

  Album 2

Interpret 1\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 1\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 2\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 3\This is a project folder.pj

Interpret 2\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 1\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 2\This is a project folder.pj

Now tell me, which structure is easier to read?

I absolutely cannot see why this dumb control file (project.pj) has to be visible in the structure.

Uwe

[KaelLizak]

Hello Uwe Hahn‌,

Things happened long before I started here.  The reason for this issue is due to the legacy of Source Integrity's development.  Originally, it was basically an RCS implementation, but extra features were added to it.  One of the things it would let you do is place two projects in one directory location (although this is possible, please don't do this, it's against recommended best practices).  In that case, you could have a folder structure as you've indicated, but Album 3 (for instance) could have two projects inside, like music.pj and linerNotesArt.pj.  Then you'd get this structure:

Interpret 1\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 1\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 2\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 3\music.pj

  Album 3\linerNotes.pj

Interpret 2\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 1\This is a project folder.pj

  Album 2\This is a project folder.pj

And if you cleverly drop the .pj extensions, you end up with this:

Interpret 1

  Album 1

  Album 2

  Album 3

  Album 3

Interpret 2

  Album 1

  Album 2

You're probably thinking nobody actually does this!  since this is something that we recommend against, but there are organizations which do use this, which is why the name of the .pj file is listed.

Regards,
Kael

[khoppe]

I agree with Kael.

In our company this way of working exists, and I haven't found any way to avoid it.

While creating a subproject each user can define an deviating name instead of project.pj,

and some of our project teams urgently requests this possibility.