Andreas Lindahl

In my opinion it would make more sense if they would be unpublished, and moved to Draft, instead of being unpublished and moved to Archived


If you add versioning to a dataobject retroactively, all the records will be unpublished. The draft table is the same as the unversioned table.

Andreas Lindahl

Yes, that makes sense. But why are they Archived, instead of Draft?


because its looking in the database for Promo_live, right? which will be empty unless you migrate

Andreas Lindahl

For example, I have a bunch of Promo DataObjects on my startpage. They used to be unversioned, but now, after making them versioned instead, they all disappeared from the live version of the start page, since they are now all Archived for some reason.

Andreas Lindahl

If I make a previously unversioned DataObject versioned, all existing instances of that DataObject gets archived, which is a pain in the butt, since it means I have to edit and save all objects to move them to staging. Which means a lot of work if a lot of objects using that DataObject exist. Why is this? In my opinion, it would make more sense to make all available instances at least Draft, instead of archive, when you make an already existing DataObject versioned. This would also mean that I could just publish the parent page, or dataobject, to also publish any Draft versions of my DataObject belonging to that page.

Jim Speir

Quite a weird process just to remove a page from the list I have to say...


I just tried it and it works on SS4.3

😃 (1)