[epf-dev] Re: EPF - Multi-Process Engineer Integration

[Ricardo Balduino <balduino@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff,

We have similar situation in the EPF
project: multiple process authors creating content for OpenUP/Basic.
As you may know, when you author content
you affect different files in the library maintained by EPFC (the xmi files).
Some xmi files are considered "structural" ones - such as library.xmi,
plugin.xmi and model.xmi - because they keep relationships between elements.
It's hard to have multiple people working on these files simultaneously
- merging versions of those files by hand is not so trivial.

You have two options to allow simultaneous
work on those files, at least that's what EPF team has done: 1) have one
integrator (I've been in this role for a while) who will receive any demands
for establishing relationships between elements,  merging elements,
adding new elements, deleting elements and such. This increases the chances
of consistency, but creates a bottleneck, as you can figure. 2) Have multiple
people integrating content, but have them coordinating who takes the structural
files at what time. We use CVS for source control, and CVS notifies people
that someone has a file locked. It helps. Instant Messaging and phone calls
to ask "can I have this file for a moment?" are helpful either.
In the future, we hope to develop a
more user friendly CM support in EPFC, which should make those interactions
more transparent.

As for the other elements, such as roles,
tasks, artifacts and guidance, EPFC creates one xmi file and a reference
in plugin.xmi. As long as the individual xmi files exist, you can have
people working in parallel and checking out and in content without conflicts.
But remember, creating new elements, moving or deleting them will affect
plugin.xmi. After that, you are free to work on the individual xmi files.

Fore more detailed information, please
refer to this guideline "Using EPFC with a Version Control System"
(http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.eclipse.epf/docs/Using%20EPF%20with%20a%20Version%20Control%20System.htm?root=Technology_Project&content-type=text%2Fhtml&revision=HEAD)

Alternatively, breaking your content
down in plug-ins is also an approach to consider, so each individual works
on a plug-in.

I hope it helps.

As a side note, the email address epf.content-inbox@xxxxxxxxxxx
you used does not receive emails. It's one of the emails Bugzilla uses
for its inbox.
You want to send notes to epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx,
where you can reach a larger audience ready to answer any questions.

Cheers,

Ricardo Balduino
Senior Software Engineer

IBM Rational (www.ibm.com/rational)
EPF Committer (www.eclipse.org/epf)

"Jeff Brock" <JCBrock@xxxxxxxxxx>

12/12/2006 07:41 PM

To	Ricardo Balduino/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS, <epf.content-inbox@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <mark.dickson@xxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	EPF - Multi-Process Engineer Integration

I am running a team of process engineers
authoring content using the eclipse process framework composer (EPFC).
Right now we are using a very bad system to integrate the teams work. Our
high level process is:
 
 
Assign a set of activities (discipline)
to process engineer
Have the process engineers (5-7) all
fill out activity, role, task, & work product templates
Process engineers send templates to
EPFC “integrators”
Process engineers input the templates
info into EPFC and then publish (weekly build) 
 
How do you guys accomplish this? Do
you use Plug-Ins?
 
Jeff Brock