It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Atomicity of "save as new requirement and link"


Vivek Iyer (15212527) | asked May 11 '12, 6:19 p.m.
All,

Within a requirement artifact, when you select some text, and click "save as new requirement and link", and then cancel out of edit mode, a new requirement is still spun off. It looks like expected behavior, but should it be atomic instead?

Thanks,

Vivek

4 answers



permanent link
Anthony Kesterton (7.5k9180136) | answered May 12 '12, 4:41 a.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER
All,

Within a requirement artifact, when you select some text, and click "save as new requirement and link", and then cancel out of edit mode, a new requirement is still spun off. It looks like expected behavior, but should it be atomic instead?

Thanks,

Vivek


Hi Vivek

What version of RRC are you using? I can sort-of understand that a new requirement is created and linked but would expect a Cancel to undo this.

It would be interesting to discuss the logic of the operation - when should the new requirements be "committed" in this action.

regards

anthony

permanent link
Vivek Iyer (15212527) | answered May 13 '12, 11:02 p.m.
All,

Within a requirement artifact, when you select some text, and click "save as new requirement and link", and then cancel out of edit mode, a new requirement is still spun off. It looks like expected behavior, but should it be atomic instead?

Thanks,

Vivek


Hi Vivek

What version of RRC are you using? I can sort-of understand that a new requirement is created and linked but would expect a Cancel to undo this.

It would be interesting to discuss the logic of the operation - when should the new requirements be "committed" in this action.

regards

anthony


Hi Anthony,

We are running 3.0.1.1.

I was expecting Cancel to undo the whole operation too, but in retrospect I thought it was probably expected behavior. I think it would be better to make the operation atomic. It will prevent the creation of unnecessary artifacts and also limit user confusion.

Thanks,

Vivek

permanent link
Stef van Dijk (2.0k179) | answered May 14 '12, 9:33 a.m.
FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
Hi Anthony,

We are running 3.0.1.1.

I was expecting Cancel to undo the whole operation too, but in retrospect I thought it was probably expected behavior. I think it would be better to make the operation atomic. It will prevent the creation of unnecessary artifacts and also limit user confusion.

Thanks,

Vivek


This is the expected behavior (it functioned this way in the 2.x releases as well). The artifact is created at the time "save as new requirement" is requested in order to establish the link. Users can even immediately navigate/open and start working with the artifact, and RRC does not "undo" this creation if either you undo the creation of the link or cancel your changes in the editor. I'm not certain about 3.x, but I believe this may have well been documented in 2.x.
I'd suggest creating an RFE to request an enhancement that optionally deletes any artifacts that might have been created during an edit session that you subsequently choose to cancel. And it should probably also request covering the undo case as well.

permanent link
Vivek Iyer (15212527) | answered May 15 '12, 10:42 a.m.
Hi Anthony,

We are running 3.0.1.1.

I was expecting Cancel to undo the whole operation too, but in retrospect I thought it was probably expected behavior. I think it would be better to make the operation atomic. It will prevent the creation of unnecessary artifacts and also limit user confusion.

Thanks,

Vivek


This is the expected behavior (it functioned this way in the 2.x releases as well). The artifact is created at the time "save as new requirement" is requested in order to establish the link. Users can even immediately navigate/open and start working with the artifact, and RRC does not "undo" this creation if either you undo the creation of the link or cancel your changes in the editor. I'm not certain about 3.x, but I believe this may have well been documented in 2.x.
I'd suggest creating an RFE to request an enhancement that optionally deletes any artifacts that might have been created during an edit session that you subsequently choose to cancel. And it should probably also request covering the undo case as well.

I just created Enhancement #59534.

https://jazz.net/jazz03/web/projects/Requirements%20Management#action=com.ibm.team.workitem.viewWorkItem&id=59534

Your answer


Register or to post your answer.


Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.