Due to the way workflow is serialized, source control systems are of little value for workflow. Most of the intrinsic value realized with source control systems for programming languages (e.g., Java or C) can not be realized with Remedy form and workflow definitions.
Remedy provides some native capabilities in this arena with overlays and object modification log, but much of the intrinsic value a source control system offers can not be realized with these mechanisms. Out of WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHY, and WHERE, the native capabilities will answer WHO, WHEN, and WHERE. To answer the WHAT, one has to inspect the details of the change deeper than the object name/type. The manner in which object definitions are stored and serialized is not conducive to this (i.e., how are fields ordered in a set fields or push fields list?). To answer the WHY, there has to be an opportunity, policy, and possibly some enforcement around commenting changes. This means there has to be a gate between the developer and the server to control changes and collect this information. Providing a comment for each modified piece of workflow is nonsense (this is the only gateway that exists today). The changes have to be lumped together and the comments need to apply to a set of changes. Axton Grams On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Rajesh Shinde <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > We are using Remedy 7.5 for our Project, We are trying to Integrate the > SubVersion with the Development Studio. > Can anyone suggest me any document (for Remedy 7.5), which is helpful in this > regards. > > Regards, > Rajesh Shinde > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
