I tried an experiment using ReqIF to export/import data, and the first thing I notice is that the absolute numbers are not preserved. These seems very odd to me, I would think that would be basic functionality desired in a data exchange method.
This is especially true if you are exchanging views with columns containing link information. If the absolute numbers are not preserved, the data in your analysis wizard columns will not match the "new" absolute numbers in the module.
Am I missing something here? Is there some method to get it to honor the absolute number?
Thanks
darwalters - Wed Jul 11 08:48:47 EDT 2012 |
|
Re: DOORS 9.4 and ReqIF/RIF
SystemAdmin - Wed Jul 11 15:10:57 EDT 2012
RIF has not been implemented very well by IBM, as a standard it is fantastic and could potentialy be used to transfer data between tools in a powerful way, lock down attributes and basically give you a powerful customer to supplier system. In practice it is flakey, does not resfactor the module if you move things around and cannot cope with changing attributes and adding objects at the same time.
I aired my opinion some years ago on this direct to IBM, saying that a useful system should allow one party usually the one representing the supplier to add and delete objects and move them about and edit some attributes and the party representing the customer should be allowed to modify other non supplier attributes only and not to refactor the module or add/ delete objects at all. This seemed to me to be an obvious requirement of any exchage system. I also said that the object identifier should be guaranteed to be the same in the customer and supplier modules, scarily this has never been the case.
I aired this opinion in 2009 and was told nothing was in the pipeline until 2011. When 2011 came around I was told that it was to expensive to alter the system to provide the functionality I requested.
The company I work for has had a system that does all the things I want except that it hard codes the exchange attribute, it has been this way for the last 10 years
RIF also increases the size of your database and can produces enormous unmanageable files if you do things like send a whole project.
I suggest you use a surrogate object identifier and copy that across as part of your export routine.
I should consider using a spreadsheet import/ export, Citrix or writing your own customer/ supplier system.
|
|
Re: DOORS 9.4 and ReqIF/RIF
darwalters - Wed Jul 11 18:07:28 EDT 2012 SystemAdmin - Wed Jul 11 15:10:57 EDT 2012
RIF has not been implemented very well by IBM, as a standard it is fantastic and could potentialy be used to transfer data between tools in a powerful way, lock down attributes and basically give you a powerful customer to supplier system. In practice it is flakey, does not resfactor the module if you move things around and cannot cope with changing attributes and adding objects at the same time.
I aired my opinion some years ago on this direct to IBM, saying that a useful system should allow one party usually the one representing the supplier to add and delete objects and move them about and edit some attributes and the party representing the customer should be allowed to modify other non supplier attributes only and not to refactor the module or add/ delete objects at all. This seemed to me to be an obvious requirement of any exchage system. I also said that the object identifier should be guaranteed to be the same in the customer and supplier modules, scarily this has never been the case.
I aired this opinion in 2009 and was told nothing was in the pipeline until 2011. When 2011 came around I was told that it was to expensive to alter the system to provide the functionality I requested.
The company I work for has had a system that does all the things I want except that it hard codes the exchange attribute, it has been this way for the last 10 years
RIF also increases the size of your database and can produces enormous unmanageable files if you do things like send a whole project.
I suggest you use a surrogate object identifier and copy that across as part of your export routine.
I should consider using a spreadsheet import/ export, Citrix or writing your own customer/ supplier system.
For my current purpose of using it, the issue of having to handle a surrogate object identifier sounds cumbersome at best. I can just imagine things getting out of sync and/or confusion over the surrogate ID. My current thinking is that the absolute number issue may very well make this unusable as a solution for my problem, and that I'll have to resort to some kind of scripting solution, probably in combination with module copies or archive/restore.
Does anyone else have any other better/different/similar experiences using ReqIF?
Thanks
|
|
Re: DOORS 9.4 and ReqIF/RIF
jmoll - Wed Aug 21 09:21:47 EDT 2019 darwalters - Wed Jul 11 18:07:28 EDT 2012
Your description of your experiences using it are not encouraging. I was under the impression that this would be the method for exchanging data, even for migrating data to DOORS Next in the future.
For my current purpose of using it, the issue of having to handle a surrogate object identifier sounds cumbersome at best. I can just imagine things getting out of sync and/or confusion over the surrogate ID. My current thinking is that the absolute number issue may very well make this unusable as a solution for my problem, and that I'll have to resort to some kind of scripting solution, probably in combination with module copies or archive/restore.
Does anyone else have any other better/different/similar experiences using ReqIF?
Thanks
It's been about 7 years since this topic was answered, but I'm having these issues with DOORS 9.6. In your experience, is there a workaround to the absolute number redistribution problem with ReqIF files?
|
|