Error on nested report folder deployment
Hi,
I’m not sure if this is a bug or I’m doing it wrong, but when I try to deploy report or dashboards located in nested folders, IC always fails with the following error:
An object 'SellOutSalesRepresentative/<reportName>' of type Report was named in package.xml, but was not found in zipped directory
For example, my current folder structure is (F for folder, R for reports):
| - Operations (F)
| - - - - Operations_Sales (F)
| - - - - - - - - Ventas_Mensuales_Madrid (R)
| - - - - Operations_Expenses (F)
| - - - - - - - - Expenses (R)
I’ve selected all this components on the subscription settings, inside Reports section. Also ensured that is not using a cache version.
The funny thing here is that when I retrieve the reports, It successfully generates the folder structure and retrieves the reports, but if I try to make a deployment of the report folders just after that, it fails.
Any help is much appreciated. Nice tool btw!
Thank you
Comments (7)
-
repo owner -
reporter Nice to hear that! Now I'm regretting not having asked about this before, cause I’ve been dealing with this for some months. I fully understand your “wait and see” approach and I’ll be waiting for news. Thank you!
-
repo owner - changed status to open
-
repo owner FYI, this isn’t forgotten. I’m currently starting work on the Summer ‘23 updates for IC2 and added this to that effort…even though it’s obviously not part of Summer ‘23 and is overdue. But it’s a good time/opportunity to work it in.
-
repo owner - changed status to resolved
Delivered in 2.2.7.2.
-
reporter Thank you very much! I'm sorry for taking so long to respond, but I have been on paternity leave. As soon as I can, I will test the new functionality.
Thanks again!
-
repo owner - changed component to Metadata Deployment/Retrieval/Removal
- Log in to comment
Hi, Samuel. Yes, right now IC2 doesn’t fully support nested report/dashboard folders. To be perfectly honest, when that feature was added I decided to take a bit of a “wait and see” approach where I’d accommodate for the change once I knew that folks were actually using it. This is the first time I’ve had anyone report (pun not intended) a failure, so this is the triggering event.
The reason for that “wait and see” stance is that it seemed a little tricky to add support, mostly due to some simplifying assumptions about a single level of folder nesting for these metadata types. As a result, it won’t likely be a super quick fix. However, I’ll add it to the near-term backlog so that it gets resolved in the next couple of builds. I’ll post progress here so you know when to expect it.