Scout numbers sheets differently in EE2007 than it does in ePD2005. Flat designs are not a problem, it's the hierarchial designs where this is an issue.
This isn't so much a problem on new designs, the problem occurs when we do an ECO. From my understanding, the sheet numbers should not change when we do an ECO. We usally use the Page-number file to control this, especially for our old legacy library designs. One issue is that the EE2007 version of Scout doesn't reuse the attributes/properties that were used by the ePD2005 version of Scout. In the program that we've written to prepare an ePD2005 design for EE2007, I go through the sch files and remove all of the properties that were added by the ePD2005 version of Scout. When the user migrates the design, all of the Scout properties are gone from the design and the user is required to re-run Scout to re-populate the properties. Because the algorithm that determine how the sheets were numbered was changed, the sheet numbers will have changed. Now the user will have to look at the ePD2005 design's PDF file to determine the sheet numbers, build a Page-number file and rerun scout. On a large hierarchical design, this could take at least couple of hours to fix and is non-value added work.
We figure that about 10 percent of our designs are hierarchical although this number is growing. We do approximately 8000 ECO's a year. If 800 of them are hierarchial, as we transition to EE2007 and migrate the designs, we will have done at least 1600 hours of non-value added work. It'll probably take us 5 years to transition all our designs to EE2007. that's 8000 hours of non-value added work. At $75/hour for a PCB designer doing the ECO, Mentor will make our company incur $600,000 of non-value added work over the transition period. All because Mentor decided to change the algorithm that Scout uses to number sheets. How many other companies are having to go through this effort?
This points to an ongoing problem with the SDD engineering groups. From this customer's perception, they have no clue, nor do they care how customers are using their products. Until that problem is addressed, we are still going to encounter these types of issues and continue to do non-value added work by both the customer and Mentor to resolve them.