Duplication of artifacts in module when trying to update existing artifacts with DNG spreadsheet import CLM 6.0.3
I am using the process documented here to import a spreadsheet into an existing DNG 6.0.3 module. The spreadsheet represents an updated revision of a set of customer requirements. My desire is to update the existing artifacts and create any new ones. I do not want to have any existing artifacts duplicated in any way.
Here is how I configure the import wizard (screenshot):
- Choose XLSX file
- Choose to import requirements into a module and choose the module that contains the existing artifacts that need to be updated
- Choose to update artifacts that match entries and create artifacts for new entries
The importer correctly updates existing artifacts outside the module but duplicates their references within the module, while properly adding new artifacts. (What I mean by outside the module is artifacts "directly in the project area.") No artifacts are duplicated in the project area. However, artifact references within the module are duplicated. (I would post screen captures directly, but links will have to do since my forum level isn't high enough.)
Does anyone have any advice for me?
Thanks in advance!
One answer
Make sure that export the XLSX from the existing module, and keep the ID, headings and references in the spreadsheet while modifying it. I have no such problem with modifying artifact in an existing module in my own RDNG 6.0.3 iFix003 environment.
Comments
Thanks for your response, Donald.
I'm importing an updated requirements spec from a customer who doesn't use DNG. I've previously imported the original version of the requirements spec in Word format. Now I need to update it because the customer provides a new revision of the spec in Word format. I copy the contents from Word to Excel, create the necessary columns, and map the artifact IDs. The "update" function of the importer works for the artifacts in the project area but it duplicates the artifact references in the module. (screenshot)
The screenshot alone looks like a defect to me. Please contact IBM Support and provide the detailed steps to reproduce the issue.