UI XML Import Error - More than one 'Script' record exists for this import

ui

(Andris Skulte) #1

During our upgrade testing from 10.0 to 10.2, I’ve been fixing the overlapped fields on our customized UI’s, and would export the xml file. We’ve updated to our latest monthly snapshot, so now I’m importing the xml files, and got the following error. What does it mean?

image

There was a similar thread for Vantage V8 2 years ago w/o an answer… Where Used customization - More than one 'Script' record exists for


(Chris Conn) #2

It means that the XML contains more than one “script” object. The script object is where your customization code lives. In order to see what’s really going on, you’ll want to open that XML in an editor. If there are 2 of them - you’ll need to figure out which one is correct, that will be a little tougher.

I am unfamiliar with the auto deletion when multiples are detected…I wonder how it determines which to keep?


(Andris Skulte) #3

Chris - Thanks! That helps a lot. Our customization wasn’t anything complex, so I let Epicor decide, and it kept the 2nd block of script.

I opened the XML is Notepad++, and there are indeed 2 sets. Very weird.

image

image

The 2nd set at the end of the XML file includes additional ‘extern alias before the using System block’:

extern alias Erp_Contracts_BO_Vendor;
extern alias Erp_Contracts_BO_APInvoice;
extern alias Erp_Contracts_BO_LogAPInv;
extern alias Erp_Contracts_BO_APPromissoryNotes;
extern alias Erp_Contracts_BO_PaymentEntry;

Doing a file compare, Epicor removed the first block, and kept the 2nd block, but it did keep the first text block duplicates of:
<PropertyName>Language
<PropertyValue>CSharp

I think I could delete it, but I’d rather not since I’m not sure how it got there in the first place! Not a fan of dirty code, but redundancy there probably won’t do anything.


(Chris Conn) #4

Ah, theres a clue. That’s probably an artifact of the upgrade process. In 10.2 they introduced the use of the extern aliases to avoid ambiguity between shared classes as I understand it. A heavy hitter like @Bart_Elia can most likely correct any misinformation I have shared and possibly offer a better insight.


(Bart Elia) #5

No you pretty much nailed it. I am wondering which upgrade process failed to clean up the tag. If you can remember what you did and submit a ticket that would be nice. Others may have had a similar problem or at least you add something we can monitor. When support gets a few non repro issues, @aidacra and team end up pinging me on a back channel to help brainstorm issues to try to nail down.

FYI - I assume this is a manual 10.0 to 10.2m not using Upgrade Services? (aka Cirrus)