WE could always baseline the docs in NON UCM vob also.
I do not see any pit falls in having a mixture of UCM/non-UCM vobs.
/gande
"Couball, James" wrote:
>
> I would be worried about baselining docs together with code. UCM does this
> easily. I suppose this could be made to work in the mixed UCM/non-UCM env
> -- anybody care to comment about the possible pitfalls with using a mixture
> of UCM and non-UCM on the same project?
>
> Sincerely,
> James.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gande Thirupathaiah [mailto:gthirupa@harmonicinc.com
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 10:38 AM
> To: Yamuna Ramasubramaniyan
> Cc: 'Couball, James'; 'cciug@rational.com'
> Subject: Re: [cciug] UCM: good for some artifacts, bad for others?
>
> Hi,
>
> Why do not we put all the documents (like design docs etc) in a NON UCM
> vob?
> Can any body tell me on what do we gain by putting these in UCM VObs?
>
> Thanks
> gande
>
> Yamuna Ramasubramaniyan wrote:
> >
> > James,
> >
> > You have it right in that any change a person makes needs to be delivered
> > and baselined before it can be accessed by anyone else. It is painful in
> > the initial development stage of the project. It is not particularly
> > mistake prone (if you can't see the doc in your view, you just can't see
> the
> > doc), but it does cause a lot of heartburn ("But I just need to see it,
> why
> > do I have to do all this stuff" will become a very familiar phrase). You
> > might want to consider having everyone use one development stream during
> > this initial phase only. That way project members can read the docs, edit
> > them etc. in real time and deliver and baseline it when it undergoes a
> peer
> > review periodically.
> >
> > -Cheers,
> > Yamuna
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Couball, James [mailto:James.Couball@cotelligent.com
> > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 8:41 AM
> > To: 'cciug@rational.com'
> > Subject: [cciug] UCM: good for some artifacts, bad for others?
> >
> > 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.
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >
> >
> >
> > http://clearcase.rational.com/cciug/mailing_list.html
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >
> >
> >
> > http://clearcase.rational.com/cciug/mailing_list.html
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 00:26:55 EDT