I wanted to start a discussion, and hopefully get some of you to support in helping to raise the profile of a much needed enhancement that Flexera engineering are currently rejecting due to lack of demand Here is the scenario: I have a licence for a suite of applications. I have active maintenance on the suite and can therefore upgrade to later versions of each application that is a member of the suite as and when it is convenient for me to do so, or if the new version provides a features I want to take advantage of. Under current FNMS versions, when I create a suite containing applications, I have to specify the "name" of each application I want to add as evidence. The restriction here is the name is version specific so I have to either specify all versions in the evidence, or create multiple suites with multiple combinations of versioning. For a suite containing a number of applications, each with a number of versions (and editions), the number of suites I need to create becomes unmanageable. When the vendor releases a new version, I have to revisit all my suites and make the necessary adjustments. Take Adobe Creative Cloud as an example. The ARL contains a definition for Adobe Systems Creative Cloud Suite 2017. This contains 15 applications all at version CC(2017). So what if I decide to keep InCopy and Animate on versions 2016, but upgrade other component applications to 2017? The ARL entry won't recognise it, and instead may tell me I need two suite licencees, or I need to licence component products I'd like to see an enhancement whereby suite members can be defined by Product rather than by Name. That way, the family of applications, independent of version can be grouped together. Does anyone else see this as an issue, or how would you go about managing mixed version suite installations? ... View more

I created add/remove programs installer evidence, then created the application and assigned this one piece of evidence to that application. Evidence shows 68 matches, yet I see no consumption against the application. (Ignored = no) Any ideas what I may have I missed? ... View more