It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Problem setting Source field when importing requirements


Ben Smiley (622) | asked Oct 13 '11, 11:55 a.m.
I am having difficulty tracking down how to set the source field for a requirement when importing an xml file using the REST interface. I know this field can be set when importing requirements because it gets set to REQPRO when we set up that interface. I can set the source ID but have not found the right attribute in the XML schema that would allow me to set the source. Has anyone else done this or can someone point me to the REQPRO integration code that does this?

Ben

3 answers



permanent link
Patrick Van Zandt (1.2k1) | answered Oct 26 '11, 5:17 p.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER
@benbert13 -- as we discussed via e-mail...

The "source" field for requirements is not exposed via the RQM Reportable REST API.

Reference the RQM 2.x Reportable REST API documentation (https://jazz.net/projects/rational-quality-manager/api-doc-2.0/) for exposed fields. Here is the section specifically on requirements, which lists all of the exposed fields:
https://jazz.net/projects/rational-quality-manager/api-doc-2.0/api-files/schemas/qm_xsd/elements/requirement_2.html

I cannot speak to the reason for this design decision but I suspect it is because the "source" field is used internally by RQM and is not intended to be user-customizable.

If you would like to request that the "source" field be added to the RQM Reportable REST API, please submit an enhancement request with the relevant business case. Here is the URL to create a new enhancement work item:
https://jazz.net/jazz02/web/projects/Rational%20Quality%20Manager#action=com.ibm.team.workitem.newWorkItem&type=enhancement

On a related note, the "source ID" field is accessible. The syntax is as follows:
<ns2>value</ns2>


For example:
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8080/snap1718.jpg

permanent link
Ben Smiley (622) | answered Oct 27 '11, 9:34 a.m.
@benbert13 -- as we discussed via e-mail...

The "source" field for requirements is not exposed via the RQM Reportable REST API.

Reference the RQM 2.x Reportable REST API documentation (https://jazz.net/projects/rational-quality-manager/api-doc-2.0/) for exposed fields. Here is the section specifically on requirements, which lists all of the exposed fields:
https://jazz.net/projects/rational-quality-manager/api-doc-2.0/api-files/schemas/qm_xsd/elements/requirement_2.html

I cannot speak to the reason for this design decision but I suspect it is because the "source" field is used internally by RQM and is not intended to be user-customizable.

If you would like to request that the "source" field be added to the RQM Reportable REST API, please submit an enhancement request with the relevant business case. Here is the URL to create a new enhancement work item:
https://jazz.net/jazz02/web/projects/Rational%20Quality%20Manager#action=com.ibm.team.workitem.newWorkItem&type=enhancement

On a related note, the "source ID" field is accessible. The syntax is as follows:
<ns2>value</ns2>


For example:
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8080/snap1718.jpg


As I understand the purpose of the source field it is to let the RQM user see where the requirement came from. When we import requirements from REQPRO this field is populated with "REQPRO". I assume it would be populated with "DOORS" for a doors integration. To consciously decide not to expose this field to the REST API runs contrary to the stated goals of the jazz platform as demonstrated by this quote from jazz.net:

"Jazz products embody an innovative approach to integration based on open, flexible services and Internet architecture. Unlike the monolithic, closed products of the past, Jazz is an open platform designed to support any industry participant who wants to improve the software lifecycle and break down walls between tools."

Not exposing this to the REST API makes it more difficult for third party requirement tools to integrate with RQM. So on the one hand IBM talks a great talk of open source and collaboration with the jazz platform but in reality they keep certain important pieces as proprietary so that only IBM tools can fully integrate. Hypocisy?

permanent link
Geoffrey Clemm (29.3k23035) | answered Oct 28 '11, 9:23 a.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
As Patrick says below, the way to get this exposed is to submit a work
item requesting that it be exposed. If everything in the internal
repository were exposed through the reporting API's, the complexity
would be unmanageable for script writer, so determining the right
balance between what is exposed and what remains private is an iterative
process. In addition, some API's are private because it is not yet
clear if they are the best way to achieve a particular purpose, and the
team needs additional time/experience before committing them as external
API elements.

Cheers,
Geoff


On 10/27/2011 9:38 AM, benbert13 wrote:
patrick.vanzandtwrote:
@benbert13 -- as we discussed via e-mail...

The "source" field for requirements is not exposed via the
RQM Reportable REST API.

Reference the RQM 2.x Reportable REST API documentation
(https://jazz.net/projects/rational-quality-manager/api-doc-2.0/)
for exposed fields. Here is the section specifically on requirements,
which lists all of the exposed fields:

https://jazz.net/projects/rational-quality-manager/api-doc-2.0/api-files/schemas/qm_xsd/elements/requirement_2.html

I cannot speak to the reason for this design decision but I suspect
it is because the "source" field is used internally by RQM
and is not intended to be user-customizable.

If you would like to request that the "source" field be
added to the RQM Reportable REST API, please submit an enhancement
request with the relevant business case. Here is the URL to create a
new enhancement work item:

https://jazz.net/jazz02/web/projects/Rational%20Quality%20Manager#action=com.ibm.team.workitem.newWorkItem&type=enhancement

On a related note, the "source ID" field is accessible.
The syntax is as follows:

<ns2>value</ns2

For example:

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8080/snap1718.jpghttp://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8080/snap1718.jpg


As I understand the purpose of the source field it is to let the RQM
user see where the requirement came from. When we import requirements
from REQPRO this field is populated with "REQPRO". I assume
it would be populated with "DOORS" for a doors integration.
To consciously decide not to expose this field to the REST API runs
contrary to the stated goals of the jazz platform as demonstrated by
this quote from jazz.net:

"Jazz products embody an innovative approach to integration based
on open, flexible services and Internet architecture. Unlike the
monolithic, closed products of the past, Jazz is an open platform
designed to support any industry participant who wants to improve the
software lifecycle and break down walls between tools."

Not exposing this to the REST API makes it more difficult for third
party requirement tools to integrate with RQM. So on the one hand IBM
talks a great talk of open source and collaboration with the jazz
platform but in reality they keep certain important pieces as
proprietary so that only IBM tools can fully integrate. Hypocisy?

Your answer


Register or to post your answer.