Builds and Build Definitions without Source Code?
Accepted answer
Yes absolutely but I think, as Ralph points out, you may be mixing your terminology...
A Build Definition is used almost exclusively in EWM to set up an automated build process of some sort. This is where it's most useful. In ETM you can create them but they are really just placeholders - if you've created them in EWM then you'll be able to see them in ETM and that's quite useful, but when you create a Build Definition in ETM it's really only used as a grouping mechanism for Build Records.
Build Records are the really useful thing in ETM and I have several clients that use these in non-software projects to show a BoM and configuration for the system under test:
- one client uses these to describe the mechanical and hardware/electronics assembly that was put together for the testing to be run on. The Build Record includes rev numbers for the key assemblies
- one client uses this to include the provisioning record for the equipment that went into a substation. This also include firmware revision info for the PLCs and other controlling systems
- one client uses it to describe the environment that has been constructed for a particular V&V phase of a rail system, in particular for things that are not present or that have been stubbed out at that time
Comments
One other answer
As far as I can tell, at least for EWM, the build definition itself does not provide a lot of value. The Build definition is only referenced within the build loop in EWM. You need a build result that has been created using the build definition to achieve anything in EWM.
At least within EWM, Build Engines and build definitions and build results can be used to automate anything that can be executed and keep an auditable track of the result.
I do not know where build definitions show up in RQM and what they are used for.
I do not know where build definitions show up in RQM and what they are used for.