Topic
  • 1 reply
  • Latest Post - ‏2007-02-14T19:05:28Z by dishigaki
SystemAdmin
SystemAdmin
1189 Posts

Pinned topic Project Console Collecting ClearQuest data

‏2007-02-14T18:00:30Z |
How is the mapping of the source fields when collecting ClearQuest data in regard to the info that was laid out in the ClearQuest maintenance
Updated on 2007-02-14T19:05:28Z at 2007-02-14T19:05:28Z by dishigaki
  • dishigaki
    dishigaki
    55 Posts

    Re:Project Console Collecting ClearQuest data

    ‏2007-02-14T19:05:28Z  

    I assume you meant CQ Designer instead of CQ Maintenance tool.

    Essentially, what you see in the PjC Designer when you create a source
    template for CQ is what you see in CQ Designer. You can pick and choose
    record types and attributes of the record types. The record type is
    essentially the measure and the attributes of the record type are the
    dimensions of the measure.

    Example:
    You create a Defect record type in CQ Designer. You create Status,
    Priority, Owner as fields for the Defect record type in CQ Designer.

    In PjC Designer, you can create a new source template for CQ. Root is
    CQDatabase. Then select Defect as the record you want to collect. Then
    you can select Status, Priority, and Owner as attribute of the Defect
    record.

    In PjC Designer, you can then create a defect measure table and three
    dimension tables (for status, priority, and owner) off the defect measure
    table. You then create a mapping and map the status, priority, and owner
    source template fields to the defect.status, defect.priority, and
    defect.owner fields of the defect measure table.

    One thing that PjC doesn't handle very well are CQ one-to-many
    relationships. E.g.: Let's say that in CQ, you define a Component field as
    a many-relationship field -- i.e., the Defect record can have many
    Component values (a list of Components). If this is the case, then when
    PjC collects a defect that has many Components, it will actually create
    multiple entries in the defect measure table -- one entry for each
    different component value. This is not so good. There are ways to get
    around this, but the easiest thing to do is to not collect these
    many-relationships unless you absolutely need to.

    Hope this helps.

    Regards,
    Doug

    Doug Ishigaki
    Process and Portfolio Management
    IBM Rational Offerings Marketing
    Costa Mesa, California, U.S.A.
    tel: 714 475 2130; fax: 714 475 2130
    dishigaki@us.ibm.com

    dw-ratdisc-admin/
    Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
    Sent by: To
    pjc-bounces@lists pjc@lists.ca.ibm.com
    .ca.ibm.com cc

    Subject
    02/14/2007 10:00 pjc Project Console Collecting
    AM ClearQuest data
    Please respond to
    pjc@lists.ca.ibm.
    com
    How is the mapping of the source fields when collecting ClearQuest data in
    regard to the info that was laid out in the ClearQuest maintenance
    _______________________________________________
    pjc mailing list
    pjc@lists.ca.ibm.com
    Unsubscribe: pjc-leave@lists.ca.ibm.com
    <html><body>

    I assume you meant CQ Designer instead of CQ Maintenance tool.

    Essentially, what you see in the PjC Designer when you create a source template for CQ is what you see in CQ Designer. You can pick and choose record types and attributes of the record types. The record type is essentially the measure and the attributes of the record type are the dimensions of the measure.

    Example:
    You create a Defect record type in CQ Designer. You create Status, Priority, Owner as fields for the Defect record type in CQ Designer.

    In PjC Designer, you can create a new source template for CQ. Root is CQDatabase. Then select Defect as the record you want to collect. Then you can select Status, Priority, and Owner as attribute of the Defect record.

    In PjC Designer, you can then create a defect measure table and three dimension tables (for status, priority, and owner) off the defect measure table. You then create a mapping and map the status, priority, and owner source template fields to the defect.status, defect.priority, and defect.owner fields of the defect measure table.

    One thing that PjC doesn't handle very well are CQ one-to-many relationships. E.g.: Let's say that in CQ, you define a Component field as a many-relationship field -- i.e., the Defect record can have many Component values (a list of Components). If this is the case, then when PjC collects a defect that has many Components, it will actually create multiple entries in the defect measure table -- one entry for each different component value. This is not so good. There are ways to get around this, but the easiest thing to do is to not collect these many-relationships unless you absolutely need to.

    Hope this helps.

    Regards,
    Doug

    Doug Ishigaki
    Process and Portfolio Management
    IBM Rational Offerings Marketing
    Costa Mesa, California, U.S.A.
    tel: 714 475 2130; fax: 714 475 2130
    dishigaki@us.ibm.com
    Inactive hide details for dw-ratdisc-admin/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUSdw-ratdisc-admin/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS



    <table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
    <tr valign="top"><td style="background-image:url(cid:2__=07BBF811DFF4F46D8f9e8a93df938@us.ibm.com); background-repeat: no-repeat; " width="40%">

    dw-ratdisc-admin/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
    Sent by: pjc-bounces@lists.ca.ibm.com

    02/14/2007 10:00 AM <table border="1">
    <tr valign="top"><td width="168" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

    Please respond to
    pjc@lists.ca.ibm.com
    </td></tr>
    </table>


    </td><td width="60%">
    <table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
    <tr valign="top"><td width="1%">
    To
    </td><td width="100%">
    pjc@lists.ca.ibm.com</td></tr>

    <tr valign="top"><td width="1%">
    cc
    </td><td width="100%">
    </td></tr>

    <tr valign="top"><td width="1%">
    Subject
    </td><td width="100%">
    pjc Project Console Collecting ClearQuest data</td></tr>
    </table>

    <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
    <tr valign="top"><td width="58"></td><td width="336"></td></tr>
    </table>
    </td></tr>
    </table>

    How is the mapping of the source fields when collecting ClearQuest data in regard to the info that was laid out in the ClearQuest maintenance
    _______________________________________________
    pjc mailing list
    pjc@lists.ca.ibm.com
    Unsubscribe: pjc-leave@lists.ca.ibm.com

    </body></html>
    _______________________________________________
    pjc mailing list
    pjc@lists.ca.ibm.com
    Unsubscribe: pjc-leave@lists.ca.ibm.com

    Attachment not added (too many attachments): "pic01348.gif"
    Attachment not added (too many attachments): "ecblank.gif"