In CE17 there seems to be another layer of messy configuration options bar in already confusing config jungle. How can I get rid of them? Our Microstaton users no need to access any example configs as we use our company workspace only. Therefore I would like to turn obsolete items off so that only our own config options would be visible. What's the point making the GUI more complicated? Who needs this?
Documentation is here: Creating and Managing Configurations (bentley.com). The XML syntax is not currently included in help. It is covered by this new blog: Configuration Tips - Manage Configuration Utility.
Configurations are stored in C:\Users\...\AppData\Local\Bentley\MicroStation\10.0.0\prefs\configuration.xml.
This file can be copied to any users provided that the path(s) stored in the XML for each configuration is/are valid for each user.
The example configuration can be hidden by editing the XML, set the IsActive statement to false:
<IsActive>false</IsActive>
Development is continuing to work on this feature so these comments will be taken note of.
This feature was introduced in response to demand from our users for multiple configurations and does offer a more flexible mechanism for control of configurations, we need to do some further work to address the questions in this thread.
Regards
Marc
So apparently I was just notified today based on a ticket I had in the system that a new undocumented configuration variable (_USTN_RESTRICT_MANAGE_CONFIGURATION = 1) was put into 17.2 to turn off the Managed Configuration link. However, it wasn't what I was expecting:
So I have actually put in a new "idea" in the ideas page since something "more official" needs to be put in place since nobody seems to be paying attention in here. The new idea can be found here:
https://microstation.ideas.aha.io/ideas/MSR-I-1164
To be clear Marc, configurations are not only stored in that location. It's based on the actual product and version of said product. So it's not only copying from a server to one location that you show, but potentially many other locations as I noted in the Idea.
Hi Sean,
The multiplicity of configuration.xml files is something I've flagged up with product management. It's clearly problematic.
The information that I posted was what was available at the time.
You can help things along by filing a Service Request mentioning enhancement 937344 as well as the idea that you posted.
(All other readers of this thread are also invited to file an SR, it helps us to identify what you need us to prioritise.)
Thank you, Marc. I noticed after posting this and the Idea that you had noted to potential for the new configuration variable in the comments of the Blog that you linked from 8 months ago. My comment was a little farsh and I apologize since it seems that you are listening. Thank you for your efforts here. Now if we can only get the devs to pay attention...
I will be researching that enhancement you just mentioned and will file an SR as well. Thank you again.
Hi Sean, thank you, I appreciate your comments.
I have always tried to view things from a user perspective and now as a Bentley consultant even more so, we bump up against these issues as much as many of you do.