[cciug] UCM: good for some artifacts, bad for others?

From: Couball, James (James.Couball@cotelligent.com)
Date: Thu Sep 28 2000 - 11:40:43 EDT

Hello,

I am using ClearCase UCM (w/o ClearQuest integration at the moment) in an
environment where we previously used SourceSafe. I am running up against a
usability issue I was hoping that someone could help me with.

It is early in the project and there are a lot of documents being shared by
the develolpment team. They used to use SourceSafe to share the documents.
This was easy for them: just check it in and the next person can get it.
Now that we have moved to ClearCase using UCM, one person must deliver their
changes, someone must baseline the delivered changes, and then the
interested parties must rebase their development stream. It strikes me that
I am not using UCM or ClearCase correctly if it is so hard to do this.
People will make mistakes.

I think that this is particularly the case for management documents. For
instance, you don't usually go through a change management process for
changes made to the project plan -- right?

How do others use ClearCase UCM for managing these types of documents in a
way that makes it easy for people make small changes and share the results
with others? Maybe these type of documents shouldn't be stored using UCM?

Sincerely,
James.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 00:26:54 EDT