You are viewing limited content. For full access, please sign in.



My Wish List for 2015 releases

posted on March 8, 2015 Show version history


I hope to see these enhancements in future releases:


1 - Audit Reports:

Currently the security for creating and running reports are All or None. And yes the database schema is described in the documentation, and we can use a variety of other reporting tools to present the data to the users, but the reports created by the web-based tool are very good but not flexible enough because of the all or none security.

** Wish to have view / run only authority, then I can have each manager to run his department Only reports without seeing other departments Audit reports.


2- Windows and LaserFiche Events:

Currently LaserFiche send events to "Server Manager: Diagnostic: Event Viewer: Windows Logs: Application", where it get mixed up with other applications events.

** Wish to have LaserFiche events sent to LaserFiche instead of Application, just like how it is now all LaserFiche workflow events sent to "LFWorkFlow".

I am using Windows 2008 built-in feature of Event Log Monitoring and email notification, but today the antivirus service crushed on LaserFiche Server and generated event id 1000 which is the same if LaserFiche application itself crushed, which triggered a false alert, it would be easily avoided if LaserFiche using it is own dedicated event log.

Note: few years ago Miruna Babatie helped me enable sending Workflow Activity Errors to Windows Event Viewer LFWorkFlow Log which was disabled by default.

3- Duplicate a document under version control:

Currently the only way to duplicate a document with all its versions is by briefcasing it and then reimport it, using normal copy and paste will duplicate the current version only.

** Wish to have more direct way to duplicate a document, perhaps by copy then "Special" paste.

4- Template and Fields:

A) The Required Field Attribute:

Currently the template is just a place holder for fields, the "required" attribute of a field belong to the field itself and not the template holding the field. It limits the flexibility of templates and reusability of fields, we have fields that can be used by multiple departments but I can't because one department needs the field required and the other needs it optional.

** Wish to have the ability to override the "required" attribute using template.


B) Display names (aliases) instead of Field Names for fields belong to templates:

Currently: The field name is the displayed name

** Wish to have the ability to mask the field real name with an alias / Display Name for fields belong to a templates, perhaps if each field can have aliases (multiple Display names) which can be selected in templates.


5- Tags:

Currently: There is no way to selectively show tags in the LF Client, and there is no template to collect them.

** Wish to have template for tags, by having templates for tags, documents can have only related tags and not the whole list of tags in the system, also it can be used for workflow to process the documents based on the processing stage.


6- Workflow Email Server Manager:

Currently by using the Workflow Administration console: Email: Email Server Manager, we can add multiple SMTP Servers however only one can be used by setting it as the default.

** Wish for LaserFiche to use the second SMTP server if LaserFiche encountered a problem with the default.

7- LF Client: LF Scanning: Image Processing: Enhancements:

Currently in QuickFeilds "Image Processing: Enhancements" when you move the mouse over the words you get an "image tooltip" explaining how the feature work, for example if you move the mouse over "Deskew" which is really good, however this feature is not available in LaserFiche client.

** Wish to have this useful feature also in LF Client.


5 0
replied on February 11, 2016

Thank you.

0 0
replied on February 9, 2016

I second 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7.

Is there an update on these requests?

1 0
replied on February 9, 2016

#2 is done. The Laserfiche Server, Forms, Workflow and Directory Service have dedicated logs in version 10. The other products will switch over as they release new versions.

#4A is also done. Required fields can be specified per template as well as globally in version 10.

0 0
replied on July 8, 2015

I have another:

How about LF products have an option to check for available updates?

I really don't find it very handy to first download the update & then run, I would prefer to have it directly from my existing installation.


0 0
replied on September 11, 2015

You would not want to just give everyone access to that as updates should be carefully planned as we are dealing with enterprise software.


On the same note, as a VAR, it would be nice to have an utility that we can track the current status and versions of the running software for our clients and when we have SCR's that come from cases we have, then we can easily see that a new update fixes a problem that client is known to have and an update would be advisable.

0 0
replied on September 13, 2015

I think the ability to install can be controlled by rights on operating system....

0 0
replied on March 10, 2015

I have a wish for Workflow for Browser Columns, it should be possible to set browser columns for all users exactly same if the folder has documents with same metadata.


For example, when the invoices are routed in the folder or folders, all of them should have the same browser columns for all users, so it's consistent.



0 0
replied on March 9, 2015

These are great suggestions, I particularly second these: 

1- Security on Audit Reports

4 - Template fields: I also find field attributes not being customizable per template to be very limiting. I had assumed the templates would override the field defaults until I tried it. This makes it very difficult to reuse fields. For instance a Document Type edit list cannot be customized easily for different sets of users. (Dynamic fields would solve this problem if the template populated a system token that could be treated like a fixed field value.) 

4 - Template field names:  As described above, we need to create one doctype field for multiple departments. I would like to be able to prefix all field names with a relevant departmental abbreviation so that all fields pertaining to one application would sort together and be easy to identify, but because this is also the display name it becomes problematic from the UI side to have lengthy columns for short field values, or just to have ugly field names. 

5 - Tags:  I agree and would make the same case for business processes, which appear everywhere. 

2 0
replied on March 9, 2015

I second 4, 5, and 7.

1 0
replied on March 9, 2015

I second 1, 4, 5 and 7

1 0
replied on September 11, 2015

I second #4

0 0
You are not allowed to follow up in this post.

Sign in to reply to this post.