RTC 4.0.0.1 eclipse client configuration changes disturbing other process configuration xml
Hi All,
I have RTC eclipse client 4.0.0.1 from plain zip file. I did few configuration changes to project area. The added featuers work for project area but othe features are not working. xml code for old features from process configuration source code is missing.
The same is used to happen for eclipse client RTC3.0.1 .I used to compare in beyond compare and copy the process source code and save. Then it was fine.
But in eclipse client RTC4.0.01 its worst than I am not able to compare. few codes arearraged hapzardly.
<precondition description="Verifies that a work item can only be saved if all required attributes are given." id="com.ibm.team.workitem.advisor.requiredAttributes" name="Dynamic Required Attributes" xmlns="http://com.ibm.team.workitem/requiredAttributes">
<precondition xmlns="http://com.ibm.team.workitem/requiredAttributes" description="Verifies that a work item can only be saved if all required attributes are given." id="com.ibm.team.workitem.advisor.requiredAttributes" name="Dynamic Required Attributes">
few more code .. that is missing also.
this is line of code arragnged in hapzard after making few changes to process configuration.
please let me know what is problem and how it should be resolved.
Thanks,
Kavita
One answer
there is no guaranteed order of the resulting XML in the process configuration.
Now, I think you said
you have a 3.0.1.1 server
and are using a 4.0.0.1 client to access this server and modify the process configuration of a project.
After save of the Process Configuration modifications, it appears some features were removed from the configuration. (which you confirmed by comparing the before and after Process Config XML source.)
you said the same problem occurred using a 3.0.1.1 client, but using the compare program you were able to find the missing XML and manually copy it back in.
but you cannot do that now, as the source is re-arranged
I always try to use XMLDIFF as it takes the document structure into account, not the physical placement.
the bigger question is why does the xml get removed in the first place.. this makes it sound like it doesn't match the required schema.
Comments
