Move files between documents

[vakilando]

Once again: very great piece of software, thank you very much!
I've just upgraded from v0.23 to v0.25.1 and from postgresql 11.7 to 13.3 - flawlessly...

What I'm still missing very much:
Move or maybe also copy (as link) files between documents!
A use case:
When you automatically upload mails (Scan Mailbox) you may get more than one document (imported mails with attachments) for the same "event" (order, confirmation, bill).
To be able to move the relevant files to one document would be grate !

Another thing...I've updated my Unraid Templates.

[monnypython]

In the principle of a DMS, it is better to store the documents separately, even if they are in a mail. So you can tag them individually and add further information. This is not possible if they are stored as an attachment in the item.

For example, how are you going to find an invoice in a few years that you haven't tagged as such. You can then neither search for the period, the company or the like. You may have already forgotten the context of the mail;).

I've got used to the following workflow:
Each document stands for itself. If I want to "link" documents, they get a tag "linked" and a user-defined field "Link_text". In "Link_text" all documents have the same content. So if I find a document and see the tag, I just click on "Linked_text" and have all documents that belong together filtered in the view.

Maybe this will help you further ...

[vakilando]

In the principle of a DMS, it is better to store the documents separately

=> yes this is mostly true

even if they are in a mail

=> this is not true in case of mail import with the scan mailbox function

In "Link_text" all documents have the same content. So if I find a document and see the tag, I just click on "Linked_text" and have all documents that belong together filtered in the view.

Your proposal is a thing to think about...but this solution is not optimal because:

• When I choose a content for "Link_text" I have to remember it for always to not accidentally use it twice and to link a file to a wrong document. (This could perhaps be solved if the custom field "Link_text" had an auto-complete function remembering all contents of "Link_text"?)
• When I choose a content for "Link_text" it must be relatively short to look nice in the GUI because the whole string is shown. So the use of an document ID is not ideal...

One question: Why do you additionally set a tag "linked"? The custom filed is shown like a tag in the GUI...

[eikek]

I use a similar approach: I have a field "Vorgang" which can mostly filled with some number that is already on the paper. Or sometimes I make something up. But I can also see the need to merge items. I'm not quite sure what you mean exactly given this title @vakilando - there is #414 and #528 - you mean the latter, right?

In my case there are sometimes contracts with additional stuff that I rather have in one item. So these I would want to "merge" into one item and remove the other. For the link documents case, I seldomly needed something beyond the custom field solution. But I'm fine with adding it, because it will be optional and if one chooses to not use it, it's not in the way. But maybe we can find a solution based on custom fields … that would be least effort and I always like reusing what is there :-)

[monnypython]

When I choose a content for "Link_text" I have to remember it for always to not accidentally use it twice and to link a file to a > wrong document. (This could perhaps be solved if the custom field "Link_text" had an auto-complete function remembering all > contents of "Link_text"?)

Yes, I have that problem too. We had already discussed this on the gitter. The listing of all the phrases used in a particular user field would be very helpful. Maybe you could activate this option for certain fields in the options?

I hope @eikek will find time for this at some point.

Edit:

Just an idea:
Would it be a possibility to transfer the functionality of e.g. the field "Organization" into a user field? You could use the + sign to create a new entry for the "link text" and then have it available in the dropdown for other documents that should be linked.

[vakilando]

Hmm not quite Sure what is better. I need one of those but merging and linking are two different things I think...
When merging it would be fine for me to only move a file to another item. The old item can get deleted if empty. Not sure if moving notes, Tags, etc. is neccesary...
Linking a file or an item to another item is less destructive, as the original file/item stays untouched.
So I think that the linking option is better, like described in #528 (relationship in teedy/nuxeo)

[eikek]

Yes, these two are completely different. I want to add the "merge" at some point. For the linking, I'm not sure anymore whether a dedicated feature makes sense. Maybe I can add a new field type where the ui could improve suggestions/editing.

[eikek]

The listing of all the phrases used in a particular user field would be very helpful. Maybe you could activate this option for certain fields in the options?

I think this could work well. It can be made available for a specific (new) field type. So the user is then to decide when searching for existing options makes sense for a given field by selecting the field type. Fields of this type could also be rendered differently in the UI.

[monnypython]

That sounds very good.
In my usecase "linking" of documents is (for now) the best way to organize related items and i use it very often.
The pre-filled drop-down field would be a (my) killerfeature 😄 which makes the workflow so much faster.

[vakilando]

I want to add the "merge" at some point

This is really great to hear!

The pre-filled drop-down field would be a (my) killerfeature which makes the workflow so much faster.

Yes, this also is a very good idea to be realized.

I'll wait impatiently but patiently for these two (for me important) features!

[eikek]

Hi @vakilando - with the release of 0.26.0 and the merge feature, is this covering what you described in this issue?

[vakilando]

Sorry for the late reply...
Yess! This covers my needs absolutely!
The only possible improvement I see at the moment is that the merged notes could include a reference to the original documents the notes came from. But I'm not sure if this is really needed....

[eikek]

No worries! Thanks for the feedback and the improvement idea. This could be its own issue - hm, maybe the name of the item can be added to the notes; not sure. I'll create one and close this one then.