Jazz Jazz Community Blog Surfing the Collaborative ALM web – RTC, RQM, and RRC

In the user forum and on other occasions the question has come up about how the Jazz based products Team Concert, Quality Manager, and Requirements Composer play together. To help explain this, I’m pleased to point you to a recording of a demo we recently presented at a Rational VOICE of the Customers event. The demo shows a prototype implementation of these product integrations. We used an outside-in approach to define scenarios where analysts, developers, and testers collaborate across these tools on a development project. The demo shows three scenarios:

  1. Create Release Plan – the analyst defines requirements in IBM Rational Requirements Composer. He links his requirement to a Plan Item in Rational Team Concert. He can traverse the link and prioritize the release plan.
  2. Plan Alignment – the teams align their iteration plans. The release plan-items are added to the development iteration plan. The analyst elaborates requirements to add detail to a Story workitem, that is tracked in a Team Concert project. The test team builds their test plan with insight into the development iteration plan and the requirements. Links are created across Requirements Composer defined requirements, Team Concert stories, and Quality Manager Test Cases.
  3. Find and Fix a Test failure – the tester executes a test and discovers a defect. The defect is filed against the Rational Team Concert development project, with bi-directional links back to the test execution. The development team triages and fixes the defect. The tester monitors the status of the defect using his dashboard. When he sees the defect is fixed and the build is ‘green’ he deploys the build then verifies and closes the defect.

A small demo caveat: the application developed by the project is JUnit. JUnit is about developer testing and this can result in confusion in a scenario that is about manual testing. Therefore just consider JUnit as an example application and ignore that it is related to testing.

There is no sound on this demonstration; call-outs are used to explain the action as it occurs on the screen.

The scenarios described above are just the beginning. We plan to improve upon these scenarios in addition to sharing new scenarios. Please tell us what you think.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (12 votes, average: 4.58 out of 5)
Loading...
12 Comments
  1. Daan vd Munnik December 9, 2008 @ 3:04 pm

    These scenario’s look interesting! I noticed the link between requirements and testcases seems to go via work-items. How would this support a scenario where “suspect” links between requirements and testcases are important ? Also taken into account the fact that requirements as well as testcases (like sourcecode) might have versions and baselines.

  2. Rafał Kochański December 11, 2008 @ 10:11 pm

    Great demo!

  3. Erich Gamma December 15, 2008 @ 4:51 am

    Regarding the linking of test cases to requirements. This is a limitation of the prototype. The intent is to also support linking of Composer requirements to RQM test cases. RQM already provides support for “suspect” links for Req Pro requirements.

  4. yu wang January 6, 2009 @ 6:35 pm

    I hope requirements management is in Jazz in future ,not in Req Pro .Integration is not good .
    I think Jazz is simple that ClearCase/ClearQuest/Req Pro Integration

  5. Marc van January 13, 2009 @ 9:44 am

    When creating a defect a link-back is created to the test case, in this movie. I would like to see more flexibility that it points back to a test case, a test log, a test script, or even a step in test script or test log.
    Furthermore I must be able to query/report to see what are the defects reported against eg a certain TC (or it’s dependant TS/TERs). Maybe this could be done via a kind of cloud?

  6. Erich Gamma January 13, 2009 @ 10:31 am

    I’ve filed an enhancement request for the request for more linking flexibility (https://jazz.net/jazz/resource/itemName/com.ibm.team.workitem.WorkItem/67682)

  7. Nelson Jordan February 9, 2009 @ 2:59 pm

    Any idea when the prototype will make it into the current version. I assume you have to use CQ as an intermediary until then?

  8. Erich Gamma February 9, 2009 @ 4:16 pm

    The RTC-RQM defect integration is available in RQM 1.0.1/RTC 2.0. More coverage of the scenarios shown in the prototype is planned for the 2.0 versions.

  9. Benjamin Chodroff April 29, 2009 @ 9:34 am

    This is *excellent* – just showed this to a group of customers and they finally *understood* what Jazz is about. I’ll look forward to more of these bigger picture presentations.

  10. Huet Landry June 12, 2009 @ 10:42 am

    Excellent first cut. I’d suggest getting a bit more clarity with the graphics to make the selection points easier to read.
    I’d like to see some more focus on recommendations to support transition to this approach from other approaches and tools.

  11. Mariangela Orme June 18, 2009 @ 8:20 am

    I would need some info on hardware sizing for putting in place this scenario.

    Say for 250-500 users distributed on several locations, using LDAP and DB2, and where Insight is also in place.

    I think RQM and RTC cannot yet share the same Jazz server. What about DB2? Do they share the same set of data?

  12. Erich Gamma June 18, 2009 @ 8:37 am

    You can run RQM and RTC on the same server as separate web apps. Similarly you can run RQM and RTC inside the same DB2 but as separate data bases, i.e., they do not share the same data.

You must be logged in to post a comment.