What kind of license is required to access RRC and RQM atrifacts out of RTC?
My developers have RTC developer floating license assigned. They are members defined in the Lifecycle Management for RRC, RTC and RQM. Within the RTC project area they have the SCRUM role teammember. They are working only within RTC, but they need some limited Lifecycle Collaboration functionalities.
Questions:
- What kind of license do they need for accessing artifacts in RRC and/or RQM?
- What kind of license do they need to create a link out of the Workitem Editor in RTC to a RRC or to a RQM object?
- What kind of licenses do they need to run Lifecycle Queries and show the links within Plans etc.?
- Which role do they need to have within RRC for this operations?
- Which role do they need to have within RQM for this operations?
Accepted answer
The problem was found with help of development.
The Developer-floating License V.3.0, we run since beginning is NOT CLM enabled.
After upgrading the Developer-license floating to V.3.0.1 the usage of the CLM suite is according license schema described in the documentations.
Silly that a v.3.0 license works with RTC, otherwise I would have updated them and saved many hours.
Comments
4 other answers
But if a User with a Developer Floating license is clicking on a "Implements" link within the RTC Work Item Editor, the users gets following Error:
A license is required to access the application. A license for you might not be installed or assigned. Contact your administrator who can ensure that a license is installed and assigned to you.
Unable to load https://bt-clmserver01.hqs.sbt.siemens.com/rm/storedquery?dojo.preventCache=1349354282365 status:403
([object Object])@https://bt-clmserver01.hqs.sbt.siemens.com/rm/web/_js/?include=A~&etag=Fu9mz32Hu_en_US:17 ()@https://bt-clmserver01.hqs.sbt.siemens.com/rm/web/_js/?include=A~&etag=Fu9mz32Hu_en_US:17 (-13)@https://bt-clmserver01.hqs.sbt.siemens.com/rm/web/_js/?include=A~&etag=Fu9mz32Hu_en_US:17
URL: https://bt-clmserver01.hqs.sbt.siemens.com/rm/storedquery
{ "detailedMessage": "CRJAZ1848E To perform the \"com.ibm.rrs.saveComment\" operation, your server administrator must assign you one of the following licenses installed on the server: Developer, Analyst-Floating, Quality Professional-Floating. You can contact your administrator, learn more about licenses in the Information Center (under Help > Help Contents), consult the Rational License Key Center on IBM.COM, or visit Jazz.net for information on licenses available for purchase or trial. (More info found at entry [b85685a1439ce082] in RRS server log)", "errorMessage": "Nicht zul\u00e4ssig", "errorStatus": "403" }
If I read that, together with the document you mentioned, I must say this must be a defect.
Comments
Also as the message indicates: "CRJAZ1848E To perform the \"com.ibm.rrs.saveComment\" operation, your server administrator must assign you one of the following licenses installed on the server: Developer, Analyst-Floating, Quality Professional-Floating."
It seems the systems thinks the user does not have a license, when clearly they do, which might mean this is a misleading error message.
Is the user a member of both the RTC and RRC projects (unless changed the default Everybody role allows saving comments and links)? If yes then I suggest reaching out to Tech Support as this probably a permissions problem rather than a license issue.
I have found it! You will NOT believe what the problem is.
- A RTC Developer license allows you to access RRC and RQM as reader.
- The RTC user must NOT be a member within RRC/RQM Teamareas, It is sufficient to have READ access in the Access tab of the RRC/RQM Project Area to read artifacts/to hover etc..
BUT, the problem I described above is unbelivable:
-
The error message is very clear: you need a
"Developer, Analyst-Floating, Quality Professional-Floating." license.
But my Users have a "Developer-floating" license. And not a "Developer" License!!!!
- To test it, I assigned to a user one of the 10-free "Developer" licenses, and SURPRISE, the user has access to RRC with this license.
If it is the license policy, that a floating license has lesser rights as the corresponding personal license, I think I will quit Jazz in our company and change to TFS,
if it is a bug, I don't tell you what I think about the developer which implemented this.