r27 - 2015-12-17 - 19:28:40 - MarianneHollierYou are here: TWiki >  Deployment Web > IntegrationHighPriorityScenarios

Integration: Golden Integration Scenarios

Cross-cutting theme technical leaders and senior editors: AmySilberbauer, DaleHobill
Build basis: Rational solution for Collaborative Lifecycle Management (CLM) 6.0

Introduction

In this section we document the Golden Integration Scenarios derived through direct customer interaction and feedback. The original scenarios developed with customers can be found here: Customer Scenarios. Just as we describe the Golden Topologies for product and solution deployment that are supported and validated, we also want to focus on the critical usage scenarios specific to integrations. These scenarios will be our primary focus in the coming months.

While we are currently focusing on these scenarios as documented, we always appreciate feedback as well as thoughts on additional scenarios going forward. Please provide feedback or pose questions in the Questions and comments box at the bottom of the Integrating page.

Top Integration Scenarios

Scenarios help us understand the activities performed by various roles in an organization in the context of their day-to-day jobs. By collaborating with clients to define scenarios, we develop insight into how our solutions are used and where we must focus to ensure a valuable end-user experience. In the sections below, you can review the scenarios we will focus on to ensure an improved experience through the development of clear and concise documentation, validation plans, and the identification and ultimate closure of gaps in the integrations involved. Where we have gaps in the integrations for the scenarios below, we have highlighted those; where we have plans to validate but have not yet fully validated the scenarios, we have provided annotations.

Requirements Management & Analysis


ScenarioDesigns_RequirementsManagementAnalysis_2.png


* Documentation: * Known Issues:
  • Global Configuration (GC) and Integrations:
    • DOORS 9 works with CLM 6.0, but not with GC management capabilities.
    • Requirement reconcile operation in RQM is NOT supported.
    • In traceability views, you cannot filter by Development Item or Development Plan links.
    • You cannot link RTC plans to versioned test plans; links will resolve to the default configurations.
    • Even if you link to the default RQM configuration, the RTC plan traceability filter will show no results.
  • In RQM 6.0, the following are not supported when working with GC-management enabled project areas:
    • RQM Execution Tool, Copy Utility, URL Utility, OSLC Cleaner Utility, API Utility
    • RQM Excel/Word Importer
    • RQM mobile application for offline test execution
* Validation:
  • The ALM Core integrated behavior captured in this scenario is well-covered by our solution testing.
* Notes:
  • RequisitePro integration has been removed in CLM 6.0
  • You can migrate from RequisitePro to RDNG, including all QM links
  • You can upgrade to CLM 6.0 and then migrate ReqPro to RDNG but you cannot use Global Configuration management (GC) until you do this

Development & Build


ScenarioDesigns_DevelopmentBuildRoleBased_2.png


* Documentation:
  • The ALM Core products in this scenario are RTC and Rhapsody. Integrations are fully documented. Links to the specific Knowledge Center topics can be found on the Integrating page.
  • Outside of ALM Core, documentation is provided for:
    • Integration between RTC and RDz, CC and UC Deploy, as part of the RTC product documentation.
    • Integration between RTC and third-party tools, as part of the RTC product documentation.
* Known Issues:
  • Rhapsody build configurations and code generation do not currently support all targets
  • Better guidance must be provided with respect to shell-sharing between ALM Core and other Rational and non-Rational products
  • Version compatibility for both clients and servers for Rational ALM Core products in the context of this scenario must be clarified
* Validation:
  • The ALM Core integrated behavior captured in this scenario is well-covered by our solution testing.
  • We do not currently validate the RTC - UC Deploy integrations. This is on our "gaps" list.
  • We do not validate integration with third-party tooling as part of solution testing in the context of this scenario. Generally, these integrations are tested by the third-party organization that develops and delivers the integrations.

Development & Build (Tool-Based View)

The visualization below supplements the Development & Build scenario to capture the wide variety of tooling that may be involved in a typical customer's heterogeneous environment.

ScenarioDesigns_DevelopmentBuildToolBased_1.png


* Documentation:
  • The ALM Core products in this scenario are RTC and RQM and include the various RTC clients and build components. Links to the specific Knowledge Center topics can be found on the Integrating page.
  • Outside of ALM Core, documentation is provided for:
    • Integration between RTC and the IDEs (RAD, RDz, RDi) and UC Deploy, as part of the RTC product documentation.
    • Integration between RTC and third-party tools (except Endevor and ChangeMan), as part of the RTC product documentation.
    • Integration between RQM and third-party tools, as part of the RQM product documentation.
    • Integration between RDz and the CA Endevor SCM is document in the RDz Knowledge Center topic Accessing the CA Endevor Software Change Manager (SCM)
* Known Issues:
  • Incomplete documentation for some IDEs: WDT, Data Architect, Data Stage, Mobile First Platform
  • Artifactory integration does not exist
  • Better guidance must be provided with respect to shell-sharing between ALM Core and other Rational and non-Rational products
  • Integration between RDz and ChangeMan has little documented details
* Validation:
  • Solution testing in the context of this scenario is focused on the most common clients: Web UI and Eclipse UI
  • Individual development organizations provide function testing for ISPF and Windows Shell clients.
  • Validation of the Visual Studio client is performed on an as-needed basis.
  • Outside of ALM Core, we rely on a large number of internal IBM development organizations to self-host, specifically for integration with UC Deploy and RTW.

Source Code Management


ScenarioDesigns_SourceCodeManagement.png


* Documentation:
  • The ALM Core product in this scenario is RTC. Outside of ALM Core, documentation is provided for:
    • Integration between RTC and some of the IDEs (RAD, RDz), as part of the RTC product documentation.
* Known Issues:
  • Incomplete documentation for some IDEs: WDT, Data Architect, Data Stage, Mobile First Platform
  • Better guidance must be provided with respect to shell-sharing between ALM Core and other Rational and non-Rational products
  • We need to do a better job articulating the SCM usage scenario with RTC as the centralized SCM tool
* Validation:
  • Solution testing for SCM activities in a scenario context focuses on the basic SCM activities; we rely on a large number of internal IBM development organizations to self-host and develop across the variety of platforms and clients that require SCM support.

Future Areas of Focus

Integrations in the Context of IBM DevOps

As we look beyond the ALM Core tool set to the end-to-end IBM DevOps lifecycle, we will be focusing on the documentation and validation of the tools that must be integrated to support Plan, Development & Test, Deploy and Operate activities. These integrations must also work seamlessly in on-premise, cloud and hybrid development and deployment environments.

Integrations in the Context of a Heterogeneous Environment

It is almost never the case that the Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management (CLM) and Systems and Software Engineering (SSE) solutions are deployed in an environment that does not require, or could not benefit from, integrations with other tools, Jazz-based or not. This includes other IBM tools, as well as third-party and homegrown tools. The most typical tools that must be integrated in such an environment, based on customer feedback, are directly aligned with our Golden Integration Scenarios described above.

Related topics: Deployment web home, Deployment web home

External links:

Additional contributors: AllisonLynch, IanCompton, AnthonyKesterton, MarianneHollier, SherriMidyette, RosaNaranjo

Topic attachments
I Attachment Action Size Date Who Comment
Pngpng ScenarioDesigns_DevelopmentBuildRoleBased_2.png manage 139.0 K 2015-08-07 - 21:22 MarianneHollier Top Scenario - Development & Build (Role-based)
Pngpng ScenarioDesigns_DevelopmentBuildToolBased_1.png manage 131.0 K 2015-08-07 - 21:24 MarianneHollier Top Scenario - Development & Build (Tool-based)
Pngpng ScenarioDesigns_RequirementsManagementAnalysis_2.png manage 150.1 K 2015-08-07 - 21:20 MarianneHollier Top Scenario - Requirements Management
Pngpng ScenarioDesigns_SourceCodeManagement.png manage 103.9 K 2015-08-07 - 21:26 MarianneHollier Top Scenario - Source Code Management
Edit | Attach | Printable | Raw View | Backlinks: Web, All Webs | History: r27 < r26 < r25 < r24 < r23 | More topic actions
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platformCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our Terms of Use. Please read the following disclaimer.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding the Deployment wiki? Create a new task in the RTC Deployment wiki project