cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

check in comments

check in comments

please make check in comments mandatory. Set a minimum character entry of maybe 10. This would prevent users from entering single character (useless) comments.

Thanks for your comment Ben.

Additional info: This should be a global configuration setting at the orgadmin level. “Mandatory check in comments, on/off”. Also this should have advanced configuration settings whether to include/exclude various object types (CAD, Documents, Parts, etc.).

17 Comments
BenLoosli
22-Sapphire III

Some companies don't require comments, leave this as an optional input field. I do not have a problem with a minimum length IF a comment is entered.

Optionally, add a preference so a site admin can make comments optional or mandatory and they can specify a minimum length.

As the idea is written, I have to vote NO!

STEVEG
20-Turquoise

Now that Greg modified the idea I will vote up.

lscheeler
17-Peridot

As much as I want people to comment more, it would drive me nuts having to do it every time, especially with a min character length.  Many times I only enter a few letters to indicate the change.  E.g. "regen" or "Revit" or "verf. FT"

Or there are the times that I simply don't remember what I did during the last check out due to interruptions.  Check in with no comments and move on.

I certainly would like more people to use this field, but rather encourage it through education and necessity.  If people refer to this info, then they will enter it.  If they never refer to it (perhaps because they don't know how or the benefit) they probably won't bother with it.

lscheeler
17-Peridot

In addition, if this was mandated for the times I didn't remember I would put in some junk like "don't remember!" or "Excellent design innovation!" or maybe just hold down the spacebar.

Then instead of having blank, you would have a database full of junk.  When I go through the iteration history I want to see useful information, yet mandating would create situations where people would be forced to enter in junk (under certain circumstances which probably happen more than people realize).

I am sure you would get more useful info entered than not mandating, but the percentage of useful info to clutter would drop.

BenLoosli
22-Sapphire III

Changed to a YES vote as long as it is implemented as preference settings.

BillRyan
14-Alexandrite

Additional Requirement:

1) Need a config.pro option to disable autocheckin from Creo Session.

Optional nice to have:

2) I would like to see the preference where this can be a dropdown menu of selections...then we can control what the user is entering to make it useful comments.  From my perspective it would be nice ot have metrics to communicate on verifying family tables, fixing relations, updating attributes...etc.  So I need somebody to create a nice QML file for a query report!

DavidBrand
14-Alexandrite

Include the option to allow comments to be applied to individula objects on a multi-object checkin form.

soerton
4-Participant

Also a Yes as long as its a preference.

BenLoosli
22-Sapphire III

AutoCheckin is already an option.

lscheeler
17-Peridot

Bill Ryan‌,

Auto Check-in from Creo still allows comments to be entered, depending on how it is done.  Auto Check-in also gives users the ability to start the check-in process with a mapkey, saving a significant amount of times.  We have actually done this with good success for one of our groups of users where it is on the tail end of a larger mapkey.

lscheeler
17-Peridot

Although I appreciate having comments, why the focus with mandating it?  In the grand scheme of the company goal, how much does it really matter if comments are there for every iteration?  It is not like it is used for the Change Notice.  Besides, you cannot really change the comments after you check them in, so what if you forgot to mention one of many changes?  Or you mixed them up with other changes you did to other parts?

Also, currently we cannot enter individual comments for each set of objects when checking in a group of components and assemblies.  So for this info to be useful you are also mandating each set of model and drawing to be checked in separately.

This is not even to go into the Combined effect of this with those who want to require checking in at the end of each day.

Are comments on every iteration really worth the significant amount of time, and potentially complexity, that would be added to every check in?  This is compounded by the fact that many users type slow.

DavidBrand
14-Alexandrite

"Also, currently we cannot enter individual comments for each set of objects when checking in a group of components and assemblies". This is what I was refering to (badly I realise, now I've re-read my comment).

lscheeler
17-Peridot

, Ahh, I get it now.  If this were a separate idea, I would vote for it alone.  This is frustrating whenever I want to put in quick comments but dont' want to have to check them individually.

BillRyan
14-Alexandrite

Ok...I guess I need some lessons!  In the picture below...if the user LMB selects in area 1 or 2 then the file automatically gets checked and I don't see the table showing up to enter checkin comments.  However, when I select option 3 for custom checkin, I get the ability to enter comments.  My request is to add a config option to disable 1 and 2 because it basically bypasses the ability to enter comments....where is this done if already provided?

Capture.JPG

BenLoosli
22-Sapphire III

Make the preference for mandatory checkin comments force a custom check-in.

The checkin main tab (1) should have a preference for auto or custom checkin as the default action. It should work like a cell color selection in Excel, drop down arrow allows you to change the setting, the button itself applies the set/prior selection. Maybe change the icon on (1) if it is set to custom checkin.

lscheeler
17-Peridot

Bill Ryan‌, Sorry, I misunderstood you.  I actually only use the custom check-in in Creo and forgot the other 2 exists and so thought that must have been what you were referring too.  Thanks for clarifying!

PTCModerator
Emeritus
Status changed to: Acknowledged