Topic
  • 74 replies
  • Latest Post - ‏2012-06-12T06:21:45Z by Tgefen
SystemAdmin
SystemAdmin
47293 Posts

Pinned topic ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

‏2009-04-16T00:30:56Z |
Hello IBM Rational ClearCase Community:

1. What is the ONE thing you would like to see addressed/improved/added/deleted in ClearCase?

2. What positive impact will (1) have on you/your organization ?

-Product Manager, IBM Rational ClearCase.
Updated on 2012-06-12T06:21:45Z at 2012-06-12T06:21:45Z by Tgefen
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-16T01:29:13Z  
    So you didn't give much context to this... I work with many ClearCase customers. I'd like to know if I should encourage them to contribute here too but I need some more background.
    Is this going to be part of some product planning? Does anything else influence it (e.g. the RFC list)? Is there any bounds on the size of the things we might ask for that might make our vote more or less useful? Does who is asking make a difference?

    Things are pretty anonymous here and the people who observe and contribute aren't necessarily representative of the customer base. So it might mean your responses are skewed in ways that are not helpful to everyone.

    Regards,
    Mark
  • martina
    martina
    1025 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-16T16:17:41Z  
    So you didn't give much context to this... I work with many ClearCase customers. I'd like to know if I should encourage them to contribute here too but I need some more background.
    Is this going to be part of some product planning? Does anything else influence it (e.g. the RFC list)? Is there any bounds on the size of the things we might ask for that might make our vote more or less useful? Does who is asking make a difference?

    Things are pretty anonymous here and the people who observe and contribute aren't necessarily representative of the customer base. So it might mean your responses are skewed in ways that are not helpful to everyone.

    Regards,
    Mark
    ONE wish for the develperWorks forum: Get the email posting fixed. Its been broken since at least October and since Marc Siegel was laid off the manual copying of email posts has stopped. Also the emails that the forum generates are truncated in certain cases (< and > characters). That has been going on at least since January. I know this isn't your thing, but hopefully you can find a person who is responsible for this.

    To prove the point, did you see the email replies to this post? I am pasting below.

    Martina
    Don't Postpone Joy - Have Fun

    ReleaseTEAM Inc
    http://www.releaseteam.com
    IBM Rational Certified Consultants
    IBM Business Partner


    On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Dignard, Norman <dignarn@navcanada.ca> wrote:

    One wish … Simplify/clarify the documentation.

    I don’t know how much time I’ve wasted reading through product documentation (Clearcase, ClearQuest, Reqpro, Rose, CCRC, etc..) to get my job done. Having to vet though the documents to put an install/upgrade together is like in trying to put a puzzle together without the picture on the box. I have found on numerous occasions dead-ends (a doc reference to another doc only to find that that doc does not exist, is outdated or it points to yet another doc) or confusing information.

    When we first started with CC/CQ (2001) there was a set of docs for each OS (Windows, Unix), in a company supporting multiple operating systems you had 2 piles do docs to go though. With 2003 release, you simplified this by combining the documents – a step in the right direction. There is however more room for improvement in simplifying in a clear and concise manner so that the reader (your customers) can quickly understand what is needed/required. Just looking at this forum on the number of questions on installs should be evidence enough to indicate that there is a problem in that users are not understanding what is written.

    Benefits – Easy of understanding, less wasted time , etc..

    My 2 cents.

    Norman Dignard

    Nav Canada Technical Systems Center
    Ottawa, ONT


    On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Seifert Rainer <ccadmin@heidenhain.de> wrote:

    Hi,

    the answer is clear.
    *** A redesign of ClearCase to get a faster metadata access to label and branch types. ***
    A first step could be:
    -> Introduction of a '-quick' access mode to CC metadata
    e.g. cleartool lstype -kind lbtype -quick
    using the "cleartool dump -l vob:" command line.
    Reason & Background:
    !!! "cleartool dump -l vob:" is 10 times faster than the traditional command line " cleartool lstype -kind lbtype" !!!
    Unfortunately, the ClearCase GUI tools (e.g. the CC Type Explorer) based on the traditional slow CLI-commands (e.g. ct lstype) too.

    - Rainer Seifert
    Dr. Johannes Heidenhain GmbH
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-16T22:52:25Z  
    So you didn't give much context to this... I work with many ClearCase customers. I'd like to know if I should encourage them to contribute here too but I need some more background.
    Is this going to be part of some product planning? Does anything else influence it (e.g. the RFC list)? Is there any bounds on the size of the things we might ask for that might make our vote more or less useful? Does who is asking make a difference?

    Things are pretty anonymous here and the people who observe and contribute aren't necessarily representative of the customer base. So it might mean your responses are skewed in ways that are not helpful to everyone.

    Regards,
    Mark
    My Responses :
    >>I'd like to know if I should encourage them to contribute here too but I need some more background.
    Yes.
    >>Is this going to be part of some product planning?
    Yes. (but no guarantees)

    >>Does anything else influence it (e.g. the RFC list)?
    One Wish - Pick yours!:)

    >>Is there any bounds on the size of the things we might ask for that might make our vote more or less useful?
    No.

    >>Does who is asking make a difference?
    No.
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-16T22:54:13Z  
    • martina
    • ‏2009-04-16T16:17:41Z
    ONE wish for the develperWorks forum: Get the email posting fixed. Its been broken since at least October and since Marc Siegel was laid off the manual copying of email posts has stopped. Also the emails that the forum generates are truncated in certain cases (< and > characters). That has been going on at least since January. I know this isn't your thing, but hopefully you can find a person who is responsible for this.

    To prove the point, did you see the email replies to this post? I am pasting below.

    Martina
    Don't Postpone Joy - Have Fun

    ReleaseTEAM Inc
    http://www.releaseteam.com
    IBM Rational Certified Consultants
    IBM Business Partner


    On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Dignard, Norman <dignarn@navcanada.ca> wrote:

    One wish … Simplify/clarify the documentation.

    I don’t know how much time I’ve wasted reading through product documentation (Clearcase, ClearQuest, Reqpro, Rose, CCRC, etc..) to get my job done. Having to vet though the documents to put an install/upgrade together is like in trying to put a puzzle together without the picture on the box. I have found on numerous occasions dead-ends (a doc reference to another doc only to find that that doc does not exist, is outdated or it points to yet another doc) or confusing information.

    When we first started with CC/CQ (2001) there was a set of docs for each OS (Windows, Unix), in a company supporting multiple operating systems you had 2 piles do docs to go though. With 2003 release, you simplified this by combining the documents – a step in the right direction. There is however more room for improvement in simplifying in a clear and concise manner so that the reader (your customers) can quickly understand what is needed/required. Just looking at this forum on the number of questions on installs should be evidence enough to indicate that there is a problem in that users are not understanding what is written.

    Benefits – Easy of understanding, less wasted time , etc..

    My 2 cents.

    Norman Dignard

    Nav Canada Technical Systems Center
    Ottawa, ONT


    On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Seifert Rainer <ccadmin@heidenhain.de> wrote:

    Hi,

    the answer is clear.
    *** A redesign of ClearCase to get a faster metadata access to label and branch types. ***
    A first step could be:
    -> Introduction of a '-quick' access mode to CC metadata
    e.g. cleartool lstype -kind lbtype -quick
    using the "cleartool dump -l vob:" command line.
    Reason & Background:
    !!! "cleartool dump -l vob:" is 10 times faster than the traditional command line " cleartool lstype -kind lbtype" !!!
    Unfortunately, the ClearCase GUI tools (e.g. the CC Type Explorer) based on the traditional slow CLI-commands (e.g. ct lstype) too.

    - Rainer Seifert
    Dr. Johannes Heidenhain GmbH
    I am forwarding this request to a contact in support/developerworks.
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-18T02:23:34Z  
    A post up-thread by Seifert Rainer pointed out problems getting metadata out of ClearCase using describe (slow) and dump (undocumented) commands. I think that's really just a subset of a larger overall problem (and solution) though. I don't think that minor incremental improvements in the existing system will ever be enough--hence I follow Rainer's thinking for a redesign--something more major is needed.

    As a specific alternative I have in mind, which other VCS systems have used successfully, is to simply provide a "real" database (or API that gets that access) with that data. I would like to see a separate, open database (of customer choice--MySQL, SQL Server, DB2, Oracle, ... whatever) used to store and retrieve ClearCase metadata. I've previously filed this as RFE 2273 if anyone would like to watch, add comments or add a vote on it.

    I'd also like to point out that this would go a long way towards addressing the claim in Forrester research's SCM Wave report: ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/rational/web/reports/forrester_scm_wave_2007.pdf

    Which has ClearCase as a leader in it's product category but points out that:

    ... Other weak spots include remote performance, administration, initial implementation time, and reporting and analytics.

    Because ClearCase itself doesn't provide much help, users just script the hell out of the basic commands to do what we can. Due to the lack of data or performance problems getting it, however, some problems are just simply intractable--even for third party vendors. Take FishEye as a specific example: http://www.atlassian.com/software/fisheye/

    A pretty unique, third-party analytical product which doesn't have support for ClearCase, despite users practically begging for it for years and ClearCase having significant--if not the most--market-share, which I should think would be incentive enough for it to have been done yesterday.

    If something like this were in place, I'd imagine that the native Report Builder (windows only) tool wouldn't have to be so slow and if the native tool couldn't provide what users wanted, we (developers) could actually build something that could.
  • jeff98air
    jeff98air
    817 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-21T15:42:36Z  
    My "one" wish: Ability to relocate elements across UCM components, when possible (component modifiable to project, meta-data intact, etc). I know it's a biggie, but in a world of refactoring, it would be a great improvement.

    My "one-other" wish: I would like UCM to automatically complete a posted delivery in a smart, efficient way, when no merge conflicts are involved. This would greatly reduce the amount of developer/integrator time spent remotely logging in to the mastering site in order to complete the delivery.

    Thanks!

    -Jeff Ng
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-21T19:51:57Z  
    1. Partial VOB replication.

    1. Realtime VOB replication feed instead of this batch oriented replication stuff.
  • judyB
    judyB
    28 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-21T23:10:17Z  
    I would like to see an improvement in the performance of CCRC accross a WAN. Improved performance would increase productivity, and allow us to make better use of resources, who are not all local to the repository site.

    This could be a big win for us as we move more and more to the CCRC as
    • the frequency and number of developers working from home is increasing
    • we are consolidating some of our smaller development sites to be more efficient
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-22T07:03:09Z  
    Possibility to easily and completely rename UCM components after they have been created. This includes both the name of the component and its directory name. Related to that is the possibility to delete, or at least completely hide vob-components. Currently, if a VOB-component is made obsolete, it is still visibly in the vob-root.

    Marc
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-04-27T12:50:53Z  
    Possibility to easily and completely rename UCM components after they have been created. This includes both the name of the component and its directory name. Related to that is the possibility to delete, or at least completely hide vob-components. Currently, if a VOB-component is made obsolete, it is still visibly in the vob-root.

    Marc
    Please fix the SAMBA/ClearCase performance.
  • omalecot
    omalecot
    344 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-01T20:59:20Z  
    My wish:

    • First, many classical triggers should be directly integrated in the ClearCase product. Evil twins should be detected and recovered automatically, empty branches should be avoided by default, checkin of identical versions of directories should be avoided by default, removing of checkedout elements, or of directory containing somewhere checkedout elements should always be avoided by default, and so on. All these problems should be filtered by default.

    • Second, don't make company pay a Multisite license if they just work locally. Because of inter-vob hyperlink, multisite licenses are consumed even when people don't mean to use multisite. Make multisite license just free!

    • Third, please provide a REAL way to use UCM in Multisite with a subcontractor, owning only a part of the UCM environment. IT JUST DOES NOT WORK. I would be very happy to talk with you about this problem.

    Olivier
  • ThosRTanner
    ThosRTanner
    87 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-04T09:24:44Z  
    1. Release the api that clearmake uses so that other build tools can do proper build avoidance
    2. Fix the blasted issue with clearmake where it misses some operation that a sub-process does, and promptly falls over with "some other process has touched such and such a file" or "such and such a file was used but no longer exists". The last I heard from rational was that every occurrence of that needed a different fix.
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-05T13:21:03Z  
    1. Release the api that clearmake uses so that other build tools can do proper build avoidance
    2. Fix the blasted issue with clearmake where it misses some operation that a sub-process does, and promptly falls over with "some other process has touched such and such a file" or "such and such a file was used but no longer exists". The last I heard from rational was that every occurrence of that needed a different fix.
    ThosRTanner:
    1. Release the api that clearmake uses so that other build tools can do proper build avoidance
    I second the concern.
    I would have phrased it:
    1. Complete the 'clearant' project, i.e. get winkin to work for java...
    2. Fix the 'Doug Robinson RFE': favour the older out of two matching derived objects...

    Marc
  • martina
    martina
    1025 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-05T18:59:40Z  
    ThosRTanner:
    1. Release the api that clearmake uses so that other build tools can do proper build avoidance
    I second the concern.
    I would have phrased it:
    1. Complete the 'clearant' project, i.e. get winkin to work for java...
    2. Fix the 'Doug Robinson RFE': favour the older out of two matching derived objects...

    Marc
    Support latest Samba version (security updates) in a timely manner.
    The version of samba that is being supported by IBM at present is 3.0.24 and it has a number of security concerns. Later versions of samba (especially 3.3) has all of those security concerns taken care of but this version is not supported by IBM clearcase.

    Martina
    Don't Postpone Joy - Have Fun

    ReleaseTEAM Inc
    http://www.releaseteam.com
    IBM Rational Certified Consultants
    IBM Business Partner
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-06T10:01:54Z  
    • omalecot
    • ‏2009-05-01T20:59:20Z
    My wish:

    • First, many classical triggers should be directly integrated in the ClearCase product. Evil twins should be detected and recovered automatically, empty branches should be avoided by default, checkin of identical versions of directories should be avoided by default, removing of checkedout elements, or of directory containing somewhere checkedout elements should always be avoided by default, and so on. All these problems should be filtered by default.

    • Second, don't make company pay a Multisite license if they just work locally. Because of inter-vob hyperlink, multisite licenses are consumed even when people don't mean to use multisite. Make multisite license just free!

    • Third, please provide a REAL way to use UCM in Multisite with a subcontractor, owning only a part of the UCM environment. IT JUST DOES NOT WORK. I would be very happy to talk with you about this problem.

    Olivier
    Olivier:
    please provide a REAL way to use UCM in Multisite with a subcontractor, owning only a part of the UCM environment. IT JUST DOES NOT WORK. I would be very happy to talk with you about this problem.
    I'd love to read more on this.
    I can well understand that UCM doesn't support MultiSite well, because of various mastership problems,
    and delivering to predefined shared branches, using global metadata, etc.
    But one reads very little about the way different people solve these in practice.

    Marc
  • JamieDodger
    JamieDodger
    101 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-06T10:38:13Z  
    Snapnamic views.

    Work transparently with filesystem driver like dynamic views but become full snapshots as files are accessed and in the background. Transparently updates, or at least notifies update is available, via publish/subscribe notification method.

    The idea of course is to give a new option to balancing the trade off between speed, latency, transparency, view creation time and so on.

    If we're going for one-wishing, then snapnamics for me.
  • martina
    martina
    1025 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-06T17:35:01Z  
    • martina
    • ‏2009-05-05T18:59:40Z
    Support latest Samba version (security updates) in a timely manner.
    The version of samba that is being supported by IBM at present is 3.0.24 and it has a number of security concerns. Later versions of samba (especially 3.3) has all of those security concerns taken care of but this version is not supported by IBM clearcase.

    Martina
    Don't Postpone Joy - Have Fun

    ReleaseTEAM Inc
    http://www.releaseteam.com
    IBM Rational Certified Consultants
    IBM Business Partner
    posting all the email responses so Raj has those as well.

    Martina
    Don't Postpone Joy - Have Fun

    ReleaseTEAM Inc
    http://www.releaseteam.com
    IBM Rational Certified Consultants
    IBM Business Partner



    On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Vasisht, Jayanth S <jayanth.s.vasisht@intel.com> wrote:

    I can speak from a CC Admin perspective echoing my developers needs.

    The ability of 'recursive-add-to-source-control' is sorely missing from the GUI. Clearfsimport -nsetevent works but not all developers take liking to CLI.

    Thanks,
    Jayanth


    2009/4/17 Seifert Rainer <ccadmin@heidenhain.de>

    Hi,

    we have a simple workaround to this issue:

    1st: Open the default "Windows Explorer" und run a simple "search query" with option . in the specific folder.
    2nd: Now, mark all files in the list + context menu 'add to source control'

    Ready!
    - Rainer Seifert
    Senior CC Admin since 1994


    On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Dilip M <dilipm79@gmail.com> wrote:

    My wish sorted with priority:)

    1. Support clearcase on Ubuntu OS. Today Ubuntu is a most favourable
    Linux OS for many embedded software development like Android, Poky...

    2. Is there any plan to make bridges between popular opensource SCM
    tools like GIT, SVN to Clearcase?
    ie, How to import sources shared on these SCM tools into clearcase
    with history?

    3. Roll back the cciug mailing list. Earlier version was far better
    than today's one.

    Thanks!

    On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs@online.de> wrote:

    Am Samstag, 18. April 2009 08:14:05 schrieb Dilip M:
    > My wish sorted with priority:)
    >
    > 1. Support clearcase on Ubuntu OS. Today Ubuntu is a most favourable
    > Linux OS for many embedded software development like Android, Poky...

    Go one step further: Integrate the MVFS code into Linus' kernel tree to make
    CC available for ANY Linux distribution.

    > 3. Roll back the cciug mailing list. Earlier version was far better
    > than today's one.

    Yes, I strongly support this one. GNU Mailman rules!

    Please, make that GNU make compatibility mode 100% (one hundred) compatible to
    the original. Just do it.

    Bye...

    Dirk

    On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Miner, Matthew <Matthew.Miner@misys.com> wrote:

    Here's mine -

    Make dynamic views work over a WAN.

    Don't care whether the Fat Client gets improved, or the CCRC gets new
    function.

    Dynamic views are, quite literally, the difference between 16 users and
    150 users, in my environment. And right now, those 134 users are at a
    disadvantage when they try to work outside the office (work-from-home,
    work-from-hotel).

    Matthew Miner

    On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs@online.de> wrote:

    Am Dienstag, 21. April 2009 21:51:57 schrieb Rational ClearCase:

    > 1. Realtime VOB replication feed instead of this batch oriented replication
    > stuff.

    s/instead/in addition to/, please!

    Batch replication is what makes replication to some of our partner sites even
    possible (we need to sync via FTP).

    Bye...

    Dirk


    On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs@online.de> wrote:

    Am Montag, 27. April 2009 14:50:53 schrieb Rational ClearCase:

    > Please fix the SAMBA/ClearCase performance.

    How?

    Bye...

    Dirk

    On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Kenneth Ölwing <Kenneth.Olwing@enea.com> wrote:

    > > Please fix the SAMBA/ClearCase performance.
    >
    > How?

    By supporting SMB2 (well, using a Samba version or something else that supports that protocol).

    ken1

    On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Marc Towersap <marct22@yahoo.com> wrote:
    Just my 2 cents on your wishes (some of which i disagree)

    Marc Towersap Sr. SCM Engineer
    --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Rational ClearCase <disadmin@us.ibm.com> wrote:

    > From: Rational ClearCase <disadmin@us.ibm.com>
    > Subject: cciug Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE
    > To: cciug@lists.ca.ibm.com
    > Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 2:59 PM
    > My wish:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > First, many classical triggers should be directly
    > integrated in the ClearCase product. Evil twins should be
    > detected and recovered automatically, empty branches should
    > be avoided by default, checkin of identical versions of
    > directories should be avoided by default, removing of
    > checkedout elements, or of directory containing somewhere
    > checkedout elements should always be avoided by default, and
    > so on. All these problems should be filtered by default.

    I'm not sure what you mean by recovering evil twins automatically. Are you talking of merging twins into a single element? That would be difficult, especially if they are ancient twins/triplets/quads/etc. And there are times when you really want to create an evil twin.

    I can see why IBM/rational would punt on that one. But autodetect would be nice, where it'd quickly parse down the parent directory version tree hunting down for any pre-existing elements with that name on lnname, and at least warn you (version .@@/some/other/version already has that name).

    I would normally agree with the prevention of identical dir checkins, but I've seen some companies that have identical directory versions (cleartool diff -pred are identical) but they have different metadata (attributes, non-merge-related hyperlinks, etc.) which make them different. As long as you can override what you wish, then I guess I don't have any real objection (kinda like how you have -identical for files), but for shops with scripts that rely on the behavior as it now is, it may be difficult, especially if they have extended clearcase and have implementations across multiple sites, where scripts and binaries have to be changed/deployed.
    > Second, don't make company pay a Multisite license if
    > they just work locally. Because of inter-vob hyperlink,
    > multisite licenses are consumed even when people don't
    > mean to use multisite. Make multisite license just free!

    May as well wish ClearCase licenses were free too!

    > Third, please provide a REAL way to use UCM in Multisite
    > with a subcontractor, owning only a part of the UCM
    > environment. IT JUST DOES NOT WORK. I would be very happy to
    > talk with you about this problem.
    >
    >
    >
    > Olivier


    On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Bygland, Brian <brian.bygland@boeing.com> wrote:

    Usable documentation and examples for ClearCase Automation Library
    (CAL). What little documentation out there for CAL is very hard to
    understand when it comes to figuring out which properties and methods
    are used to do anything. There are no examples found anywhere in Google
    that actually make any sense to someone new to CAL (and Visual Basic).

    Also for CAL, the exceptions all seem to use the same error number. I
    then have to parse the message to see what I need to do. It would be
    much easier if each error had its own number AND the error numbers were
    published somewhere. If we cannot have individual error numbers, at
    least publish the error messages so I don't have to deliberately cause
    an exception just to capture the resulting message.

    Live Long & Prosper! Brian Bygland
    The Boeing Company - CATIA ClearCase Support

    On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs@online.de> wrote:

    Am Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009 20:59:40 schrieb Rational ClearCase:

    > Support latest Samba version (security updates) in a timely manner.
    >
    > The version of samba that is being supported by IBM at present is 3.0.24
    > and it has a number of security concerns. Later versions of samba
    > (especially 3.3) has all of those security concerns taken care of but this
    > version is not supported by IBM clearcase.

    I wrote it before, but maybe you missed it: "Not supported" doesn't imply
    "doesn't work". So if you want to use 3.3, what prevents you from doing so
    (given it works, of course)?

    Bye...

    Dirk
    On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Martina Riedel <martina.riedel@gmail.com> wrote:

    yes, but when it is not "officially supported" IBM will not help you with issues; sometimes not even with issues that have nothing to do with Samba (if you are honest (or stupid) enough to tell them). For some companies that is a major hurdle, to the point of not considering Samba as an interop solution.

    --
    Martina
    Don't Postpone Joy - Have Fun

    ReleaseTEAM Inc
    http://www.releaseteam.com
    IBM Rational Certified Consultants
    IBM Business Partner
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-12T20:38:14Z  
    If you are thinking - "So, What happens with the contribution/feedback I provide here" -

    Our intent is to get the thread going , then collate this information (around Q3 time frame) , turn the info into RFEs (or attach to existing RFEs), using the IBM Rational RFE Community to drive priorities for future releases..

    So, keep contributing :)
  • omalecot
    omalecot
    344 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-13T05:07:05Z  
    >>On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Marc Towersap <marct22@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >> > Second, don't make company pay a Multisite license if
    >> > they just work locally. Because of inter-vob hyperlink,
    >> > multisite licenses are consumed even when people don't
    >> > mean to use multisite. Make multisite license just free!

    >> May as well wish ClearCase licenses were free too!

    Maybe I was not clear enough: MS license may be consumed in some VOBs/PVOBs, even if VOBs/PVOBs are of local use only, and non-replicated.
    If it is not possible to limit the MS license use to the effectively replicated VOBs/PVOBs, if there is no technical solution, to make MS license free could be the solution.
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-14T11:34:05Z  
    1. deliver better user documentation, like short HowTos for beginners
    reason: for beginners CC is too complex, so they try to avoid CC and go for SVN or others

    2. support contractors (like me) in argumenting to convince customers/managers to use CC instead of SVN or others
    provide reference material about cost savings with CC/MS !!!!

    3. reconsider your marketing strategy - make it cheaper !!!, especially include MultiSite for free !!
    reason: more and more I experience, that CC very often loses the race against SVN or other open source
    CM tools - just because of the license costs.

    4. improve CC GUI on UNIX, include ALL cleartool functionality in CC GUI
    and provide better user documentation for that

    so far for now - technical wishes coming soon

    Cheers
    Uwe

    --
    Dipl. Inform. Uwe Satthoff
    ( jcp@comasy.de )
    currently consultant @ Airbus
    ( Uwe.Satthoff@airbus.com )
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    47293 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-21T10:00:06Z  
    ONE THING : Recursive Add-To-Source-Control feature in the normal CC client as well, just like it is available in CCRC 7.1

    POSITIVE IMPACT : This will make it easier for CC users to add files under CC without the hassle of doing an import.
  • barua_zonee
    barua_zonee
    58 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-05-21T11:22:10Z  
    ONE THING : Recursive Add-To-Source-Control feature in the normal CC client as well, just like it is available in CCRC 7.1

    POSITIVE IMPACT : This will make it easier for CC users to add files under CC without the hassle of doing an import.
    It is good to get fulfilled this wish which will make the life quite easier. BUT i do not think that we requires "recursive add to source control" as if you are working with Clearcase on daily basis then all the files can be added on one/two day basis and there wiil be no need to do a recursive check-in. Still if you require this you can perform an operation from Windows(discussed earlier) which results in recursive check-ins.
    Since we(i with my team) are using clearcase on daily basis and do not require this operation at urgent....

    May cc-developers provide this to make life easier..!!!!!!!!!
    thanks,
    barua-zonee
  • cm@heart
    cm@heart
    418 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-06-02T17:06:30Z  
    1.Improve documentation.It just does not seem to flow easy especially for beginners.
    2.Surprisingly no one mentioned anything about view privates.So many times I have had users looking for their view privates after deleting them.If the user deletes view private from the CC explorer,its gone! I think it should end up in the recycle bin or in the containers.
    3. I'm not sure how CC/CQ measures against 508 standards. There does not seem to be any documentation on it.

    Regards
    Henna
  • judyB
    judyB
    28 Posts

    Re: ONE WISH FOR CLEARCASE

    ‏2009-06-02T23:31:48Z  
    • cm@heart
    • ‏2009-06-02T17:06:30Z
    1.Improve documentation.It just does not seem to flow easy especially for beginners.
    2.Surprisingly no one mentioned anything about view privates.So many times I have had users looking for their view privates after deleting them.If the user deletes view private from the CC explorer,its gone! I think it should end up in the recycle bin or in the containers.
    3. I'm not sure how CC/CQ measures against 508 standards. There does not seem to be any documentation on it.

    Regards
    Henna
    Another wish: Something to facilitate our code review process in CCRC. To get diffs, developers
    • Use the CC Metadata Navigator Explorer to browse to the stream and activity for which they need to review changes
    • Right click the activity, select properties, and go to the Change Set tab
    • Make a list of all versions in the change set
    • Go back to a view, browse to each file, right click and Show Version Tree from the Tools menu
    • Select the element version, right click, and Diff with Predecessor
    Because we review code prior to delivery this requires an extra view if new files have been added