I noticed that attribute rules are not copied when using Feature Class to Feature Class. I am not sure if this is intended or not, but it may be useful.
@KoryKramer, in my experience, the Copy tool works great if you are copying an entire feature class and you are not copying into a dataset, but if you need to use an expression to filter just a subset, or you need to move the data into a dataset and your coordinate systems do not match, then Feature Class to Feature Class is your only option. Believe me, there are times I would love to use Copy because it does bring along everything from the origin feature class, but sometimes it is not a viable option and I am left using Feature Class to Feature Class where I will be spending some quality time with the new feature class setting it back up like the original.
As a database and applications manager for my organization, I spend a lot of time moving feature classes and tables from database to database during the development cycle (i.e., copy a prod feature class to a dev database/dataset, copy a dev feature class to a staging database/dataset, copy a staged feature class into prod database/dataset). @LyonMNGIS suggestion would indeed make the tool much more useful and save professionals like myself, a lot of time.
@KoryKramerTo add to Randy's comments I needed to add and re-order fields in my File Geodatabase which apparently is not an option unless we use feature class to feature class... Let me know if there is any other option to reorder fields in a Geodatabase.
Thanks for the details. I'll open this back up to voting and it can be assessed by the team.
For now, it sounds like you would then need to use Feature Class to Feature Class to do the data management needed (re-ordering fields, etc.) and then export your attribute rules from the original and import attribute rules to the copy.
It would be great to see this implemented but only as an option and not automatic. I have cases where I don't want attribute rules copied as they would break the destination FC. If both "feature class to feature class" and "copy" bring in attribute rules then I will have to do post processing to remove them.
I just checked in a daily build and I do see the attribute rules getting copied when using Feature Class to Feature Class. So that would satisfy this idea. Let me know if I'm missing something.
Thank you for your response. I will try to clarify my needs better...
I have a case where I need to copy my data into a new layer with different fields and a different projection. In addition, I also would like the option to keep attribute rules for Pro users or delete them for ArcMAP users. It appears that I can use "Feature Class to Feature Class" to adjust the fields and Projection for ArcPro users and then subsequently use "Copy Features" to scrub out the attribute rules for ArcMAP users.
I think it could be useful (but not required) if "Feature Class to Feature Class" gave us an environmental option so we can adjust the fields, projection, and optionally scrub the attribute rules in a single tool as opposed to needing to daisy chain Feature Class to Feature Class and Copy Features together.
I hope that clarifies my idea. Thank You
*P.S. I apologize as I previously thought that Feature Class to Feature Class removed all of the attribute rules.
Thank you for the clarification @LyonMNGIS That does help to understand the workflow. Through communicating here and on the other thread, it looks like, as you've said, you can accomplish the field mapping part and maintaining the attribute rules using Feature Class to Feature Class (I believe the new Export Features tool will serve you well here too). And then if you need to remove the attribute rules, use the Copy Features tool. I understand that the request now is to have an option built in to the tool (FC2FC, Export Features, etc.) to allow you to drop certain things when copying a feature class, but for now, you have a path forward. Thank you!
