Report Conversion 2004 to 2015

SOLVED

My company upgraded Timeslips to 2015 from 2004.  2004 was very stable and error free until we upgraded our PCs to 64 bit, etc.  Anyway, the layouts for my billing reports did not appear to convert properly.  I can see my custom layout in the Billing Statement Layout List but when I open it, it looks like a default report.  I did not set up these reports so maybe Layout 00001 is a typical report.  But all of my client accounts reference either Layout 00001 or one of the other reports in the list, which are also incorrect.

  • 0

    Not surprising as there have been lots of changes to the bill layout functionality along the way!  The later Timeslips versions use .tsl files for the layouts where the earlier versions like your previous 2004 used .rpt files.  My best advice is that you will need to find those RPT files and import them to TSL files individually and then assign to your clients.  Note the import/export toolbits on the right hand toolbar of the bill and statement layout list you included above.

  • 0

    In the 2005 version the way layouts work was changed.  When you did the conversion my guess is that you did not have your correct bill layout assigned so your layout did not fully convert.  When I do conversions from oldest versions I usually bring them to 2005 and then upgrade

    The easiest is probably to just create the layout you want in the new version.

    The other alternative would be to set things up properly and upgrade again. My guess is you don't have easy ability to go back to 2094 to set it up so you would either need to work with a consultant or just fix your new layout.

    Personally I would just create the layout in the new version as you can't be certain that the layout will convert correctly.

  • 0 in reply to AllenH

    That's what I thought too about importing the .rpt.  However, it appears that the bill layout was saved internally within Timeslips.  I cannot find a .rpt file that has the same name as the bill layouts saved for each client.  I did a *.rpt search within the directory and could not find it.

  • 0 in reply to SteveO

    As Caren suggested your most cost effective approach may be to recreate your layouts from scratch.  When you do so give some thought to the naming convention.  Use standard bill for example and perhaps use client names when you use the standard to morph to something special for a particular client.  That way you don't get stuck with "layout001" and wonder what the heck that name means.

  • 0 in reply to Caren2

    Could you briefly elaborate as to what was not set up properly in regards to not having the correct bill layout assigned.  I have access to the old version and could do that easily.  I did not set up the layouts initially but it is possible that they were not done properly.

    Thanks

  • 0 in reply to SteveO

    Generally speaking you need to make sure that generate bills is saved with the correct bill layout. However even if you do everything right sometimes the layout doesn't convert. That's why we suggest just modifying the current layout to what you need.

  • 0
    verified answer

    Steve:

    What Allen and Caren are hinting at is that this is a bit more complex than you might think.  So it is very difficult to write out a nuanced set of instructions here.  While this board is great for short topics, it doesn't work so great for long topics.  

    This is a long topic type of question.

    I am going to try to give you a short explanation of what is going on, which may give you enough information to assist you, but will likely still fall short. At which point you will have to decide if the old layouts are worth trying to retrieve, or if you want to just build a new one as suggested.  Either of which will likely go much faster if you hire one of us to help you with it since we do this all the time for a living (which just means we have a LOT more experience at modifying layouts than most Timeslips users who only have to do it once for their own database).

    In version 2004, how a bill would look was a function of two parts, the RPT file which stored things like fonts and where to print items, and the Bill Layout Template that stored lots of check marks about whether to include that data element on the bill.  So the Layout Template stored the WHAT to show, and the RPT file stored the HOW to show it.

    To find you which RPT file you were using, open the 2004 version, go to Generate Bills, Formats tab and look at the first line which will give you the path to the RPT file.  It could be named anything. and stored anywhere. What is important to note here is that the RPT file was NOT considered part of the database files, and would NOT have been included in any backup of the database.

    To see the Bill Layout Templates assigned to each client, open up the Client Information, go to the Format tab and see which Template was assigned.  If you open the Template contents you will be able to see what was checked off to be included/show on the bill.  The Format tab also has some options for messages that can be added to a bill for that client.

    So, that will tell you what you had in v2004.

    When a database is converted, IF the converter can see the RPT file in old path, it will try to combine that with the Bill Layout Templates check marks and create a whole NEW thing called a Bill Layout in version 2015 (this is simplifying things just a bit, but the gist is the same).  It will automatically name them Layout001, Layout002, etc., every time it finds a unique/different combination of the old RPT + Bill Layout Templates + Messages and attempt to assign this new Bill Layout to the corresponding client who would have had those settings in the old database.  In other words it tries as best it can to preserve what you had.

    My GUESS (and it is only a guess as you have not provided any information on this) is that when you ran your conversion, you did so on a backup of the old data that either did not have any reference to the old RPT, or could not access it via the old path.  When that happened, Timeslips (instead of just throwing up its hands and failing the conversion) used the default RPT settings to combine with the Bill Layout Templates to create your new v2015 Bill Layouts.  Thus "losing" your old look and feel of the bill.

    Again, if those old layouts are especially important to you, we can work with you to bring them back in, but in our experience what most folks want is a handful of Bill Layouts deriving from a common theme.  I.e., they have a one basic bill layout that they like and use most of the time, and then may have a few others with minor tweaks, such as - with Previous Balance and Payments, and without Previous Balance and Payments.  So we work with them to the get the new main version the way they like it and then copy and modify it for the variants. We can then assign the new and improved templates to the clients for billing going forward.

    Hope this helps.  

    If you think this suggestion was especially helpful, please consider rating it within the five star option, or clicking the green Yes button next to the "Did this answer your question?" option below.  Thanks.

    Nancy Duhon, Esq.

    Master Certified Consultant for Timeslips,Certified Consultant for Amicus Attorney and Credenza

    Duhon Technology Solutions, LLC

    a member of Certified Resources Network, LLC

    [email protected]

    404-325-9779

    Providing personalized local and remote online support for Timeslips users for over 20 years. Available for private consultations, including older/unsupported versions.

  • 0 in reply to Nancy Duhon

    Thank you all.

    Nancy, what you had indicated is my thought process as well.  I don't think the conversion process had access to the .RPT files.  I found the .RPT file of our bill, which is separate from the templates. The templates  were named Template 0001 in 2004 and converted to Layout 0001 in 2015.  I opened the .RPT file that our bills utilized in 2004.  Generally, they are much closer to the bill format as designed; however, now, in 2015, new columns and some other data fields were never there in the old report.

    I will have to figure out, as you indicated, which option is best.

    For now, I think I have my answer.