RTC and CQ Integration
Hi
Sorry I am new to RTC and agile. My question is regarding RTC and CQ integration. What we are looking to do is to drive our projects through RTC. Hence we would like to employ CQ as the defect engine. My question is based on the integration that is supported with this integration. If I add the defect through RTC (i.e, within the Story, I go to Links and select Affected by defect then i get choice Link or create a defect in CQ) Does this mean that when the defect closes, the linked defect item I created will have a line through this as per closing of storys etc..? Thanks |
4 answers
Ralph Schoon (63.7k●3●36●48)
| answered Aug 22 '12, 7:32 a.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
Steve,
basically RTC has its own defect engine that is tightly integrated with all other parts. You can use the following CQ integrations: 1. The CQ bridge. This allows you to link CQ elements to RTC work items and navigate back and forth. There are also views to show traced elements. 2. The CQ Synchronizer that copies data back and forth. CQ elements would have copies as RTC elements. This is not the best way to be used. There are obviously issues with conflicting changes on different sides. |
|
Hi Ralph
Thanks for the reply. Since from a project perspective we have to employ CQ maybe the best way is to create the report in CQ and add this as a link via Related Artifacts as the quickest method of status. Thanks |
|
Ralph Schoon (63.7k●3●36●48)
| answered Aug 22 '12, 10:30 a.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
The best option (if you are allowed to do this) is, I guess, to have high level/plan items in CQ. Link them to plan items in RTC (few) and have the internal defects and planning items etc in RTC. Link the plan items between RTC and CQ. For the hopefully few task items you get in CQ, you can create a placeholder in RTC and link both.
If this is not feasible and you need to have fine grained duplicates in both repositories, the synchronizer might be an option, if you can avoid to duplicate too many data. The issue with synchronizing is that it has a hard time with dynamically changing requirements such as required attributes. Also if synchronizing statesyou need to be able to convert states and state changes. This would probably require to customize the RTC process to be mappable to the CQ process. The next issue that comes into mind is changing the process on either side could affect the synchronizer. I general loosely coupling the data is easier to handle and preferred. Comments
Ralph Schoon
commented Aug 22 '12, 10:38 a.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
And to answer the lingering question, the CQ defect will not be affected by the state change of an item in RTC (and vice versa) if using the bridge. However, you should be able to see the closed work item in traceability views. |
|
Hi Ralph
Thanks for your answers. Could I clarify "you should be able to see the closed work item in traceability views". I have the CQ bridge added to RTC. In RTC, we link the ALM to the story. When the ALM closes, there is no lining of the ALM link as there would be with closing a task. Should this be lined out? |
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.