Jeff, We have similar situation in the EPF project: multiple process authors creating content for OpenUP/Basic. As you may know, when you author content you affect different files in the library maintained by EPFC (the xmi files). Some xmi files are considered "structural" ones - such as library.xmi, plugin.xmi and model.xmi - because they keep relationships between elements. It's hard to have multiple people working on these files simultaneously - merging versions of those files by hand is not so trivial.
You have two options to allow simultaneous work on those files, at least that's what EPF team has done: 1) have one integrator (I've been in this role for a while) who will receive any demands for establishing relationships between elements, merging elements, adding new elements, deleting elements and such. This increases the chances of consistency, but creates a bottleneck, as you can figure. 2) Have multiple people integrating content, but have them coordinating who takes the structural files at what time. We use CVS for source control, and CVS notifies people that someone has a file locked. It helps. Instant Messaging and phone calls to ask "can I have this file for a moment?" are helpful either. In the future, we hope to develop a more user friendly CM support in EPFC, which should make those interactions more transparent. As for the other elements, such as roles, tasks, artifacts and guidance, EPFC creates one xmi file and a reference in plugin.xmi. As long as the individual xmi files exist, you can have people working in parallel and checking out and in content without conflicts. But remember, creating new elements, moving or deleting them will affect plugin.xmi. After that, you are free to work on the individual xmi files. Fore more detailed information, please refer to this guideline "Using EPFC with a Version Control System" (http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.eclipse.epf/docs/Using%20EPF%20with%20a%20Version%20Control%20System.htm?root=Technology_Project&content-type=text%2Fhtml&revision=HEAD) Alternatively, breaking your content down in plug-ins is also an approach to consider, so each individual works on a plug-in. I hope it helps. As a side note, the email address [EMAIL PROTECTED] you used does not receive emails. It's one of the emails Bugzilla uses for its inbox. You want to send notes to [email protected], where you can reach a larger audience ready to answer any questions. Cheers, Ricardo Balduino Senior Software Engineer IBM Rational (www.ibm.com/rational) EPF Committer (www.eclipse.org/epf) "Jeff Brock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/12/2006 07:41 PM To Ricardo Balduino/Cupertino/[EMAIL PROTECTED], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc Subject EPF - Multi-Process Engineer Integration I am running a team of process engineers authoring content using the eclipse process framework composer (EPFC). Right now we are using a very bad system to integrate the teams work. Our high level process is: Assign a set of activities (discipline) to process engineer Have the process engineers (5-7) all fill out activity, role, task, & work product templates Process engineers send templates to EPFC ?integrators? Process engineers input the templates info into EPFC and then publish (weekly build) How do you guys accomplish this? Do you use Plug-Ins? Jeff Brock
_______________________________________________ epf-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
