The revision ID value may not contain the series delimiter character: "."

[Gerhard@SD]

Has anybody an idea what's behind this change in Windchill 13.0? https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article/CS423384 

We have been told that the dot was never really supported but not checked till WT13.0.

We and our suppliers are used to have a x.y rev. system for decades!

Anybody already changed the system? Side effects?

Thank you for your valued answers! 🙂

[Fadel]

I'm not sure if I have understood this correctly , But I think you talk about the multilevel versioning like A.A.1 .

Prior to 13.0 we could have systems form WC9 with legacy contexts having multilevel versioinng ,while new context use single level , there was also a tool to convert to sungle level .

Starting 13.0 multilevel is prohibited and all data need to be converted to single level before upgrade  

[avillanueva]

I think you are right on @Fadel . 13 is the first version that removes multi-level versioning. I think having a custom series with dots would be confusing for any parsers that PTC had. I would open a TS ticket but start planning on altering your version series. Did you just upgrade or are you testing upgrades?

[Gerhard@SD]

Hi, more a switch over from another world to WT. Perhaps interesting what other WT using companies have done to end multi-level versioning. Or are we the only customer with this topic? Thank you for your advices!

[Marco_Tosin]

Take a look also to these two discussions

https://community.ptc.com/t5/Windchill/Single-Level-View-Version-Conversion-Deprecation-and-warning/m-p/985989

https://community.ptc.com/t5/Windchill/Results-of-Single-Level-Version-Conversion-Utility/m-p/992058

[Catalina]

Hi Gerhard@SD,

I wanted to see if you got the help you needed.

If so, please mark the appropriate reply as the Accepted Solution or please feel free to detail in a reply what has helped you and mark it as the Accepted Solution. It will help other members who may have the same question.
Please note that industry experts also review the replies and may eventually accept one of them as solution on your behalf.

Of course, if you have more to share on your issue, please pursue the conversation.

Thanks,

[Gerhard@SD]

Thank you Fede!

Correct, we are used to have versions like 1.0, 1.5, 25.3 with additional rev.(as lowest part of the 3 digit version) 0, 1, 2, 3 in our Oracle e6 system for 2 decades. At the moment we have a WT12.1 test system with this versioning, now called revisioning 1.0, 1.5, 25.3 and the obgligatory iterations 0, 1, 2, 3. An API is already programmed to migrate most of the relevant data to WT. For the productive system we have WT13 planned and now, a few weeks before the planned start, we got this dot message from the support partner to use - or , instead of the dot.

In my world the dot is THE separator, but perhaps I have to change my little world! 😉 But I always want to understand why! 🙂