Bruce:

thanks, I do have an additional question regarding the topic, it looks like
I can define a "practice" as a guidance item. Within a practice, I can
reference a role, so far so good, I can define a RACI practice, which
contains Responsible, Accountable... practices.

However, I cannot reference a practice from a Work Product Guidance. yet in
the help file it says in the Guidance Relationships section (see table) that
a practice can be referenced by a work product, task and role (which makes
sense to me).

In the text below it says: Practice has a relationship to these elements,
not from them. Why is that? that does not make complete sense to me.
Assuming this is logical, how come, I cannot associate a practice to any
other guidance type (for instance: concept). I should be able to define a
RACI concept (per work product) and then associate Practices elements that
attaches roles to it.

I also tried to use the custom category route which allows me to define a CC
with my RACI practice. I can then go to work product and associate it with
this CC. However, when I preview the work product it does not give me a link
to the CC.

I am out of luck.

It looks to me that the relationship between work products and role is
incomplete.

thanks,

JJ-


On 9/25/07, Bruce Macisaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi JJ,
>
> Currently the EPF metamodel is quite strict, although we've had
> discussions about allowing user extensions (like user-defined guidance types
> and role assignment types
> to support RACI).
>
> In the meantime you can put such information in a table, as described in
> the following Rational Edge article by Mark Lines http://www.ibm.com
> /developerworks/rational/library/feb07/lines/index.html?S_TACT=105AGX15&S_CMP=EDU
>
> Another workaround (credit to Margaret Hedstrom for this idea) - you could
> create a plug-in that has a contributing work product for every work product
> in your library, and add the RACI information as text to the "key
> considerations" field.
> For example, if for the Vision work product you want Architect and
> Stakeholder roles to be consulted, and Tester and Developer to be informed,
> then
> you could add the following text to a contributing Vision work product.
>
> Consulted:
>
>    - *Role: Architect*
>    - *Role: Stakeholder*
>
> Informed:
>
>    - *Role: Tester*
>    - *Role: Developer*
>
>
>
> Bruce MacIsaac
> Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content Team
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> phone: (408)463-5140
>
>
>
>   *"Jean-Jacques Dubray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 09/24/2007 03:11 PM   Please respond to
> Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List        <
> [email protected]>
>
>    To
> [email protected]  cc
>   Subject
> [epf-dev] EPF Metamodel extensions
>
>
>
>
> not sure this is the correct place to pose this question but I am
> evaluating EPF for our needs and I ran into a snag. I can't find a place to
> associate our RACI roles to a work product (responsible, accountable,
> consulted and informed). I found a way to associate a role to a work product
> via a responsible association.
>
> Is there anyways I could expand EPF's metamodel to add an accountable,
> consulted and informed category in the role's work product tab?
>
> thanks,
>
> JJ-_______________________________________________
> epf-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> epf-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
>
>


-- 
Jean-Jacques Dubray
425-445-4467
_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev

Reply via email to