RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System [not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
Sorry - my mouse was possessed and started clicking reply/send
uncontrollably.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Wyatt
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:44 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
[not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
You are not alone...
Regards,
Bob Wyatt
Ashwood Computer, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hennessey, Mark
F.
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 14:00
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
[not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
Am I the only one who has received this message three times?
-Original Message-
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System [not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
Me, too! (I've always wanted to say that.) -- Regards, Clif On 1/18/07, author wrote: Am I the only one who has received this message three times? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System [not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
No I got it 3 times as well.
Gordon J. Glorfield
Sr. Applications Developer
UnitedHealthcare's Mid-Atlantic Health Plans
301-360-8839
"Hennessey, Mark F." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/18/2007 01:59 PM
Please respond to
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
cc
Subject
RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System [not-secure]
2005 {Unclassified}
Am I the only one who has received this message three times?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bobby Worley
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:56 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
2005 {Unclassified}
[snip]
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or
proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to
which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended
recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System [not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
You are not alone...
Regards,
Bob Wyatt
Ashwood Computer, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hennessey, Mark F.
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 14:00
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
[not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
Am I the only one who has received this message three times?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bobby Worley
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:56 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
2005 {Unclassified}
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Leach
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 3:42 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
2005 {Unclassified}
Kevin
Absolutely agreed: dictionaries have a strange place in the MV world
since
they can be user defined for a useful report, but changes might screw up
a
selection required for a program. Which, as we all know, can be bad bad
BAD.
My approach has been to make everything 'source'. Rather than create
dictionaries directly (urgh) I create a simple script to define one or
more
files - a bit like CREATE TABLE but just for regular files. An example
might
look like this:
BEGIN TABLE BOOK_TITLES
SUBJECT "Audio Book Titles"
FIELD TITLE_ID FNO 0 NUMERIC
FIELD SHORT_TITLE FNO 1 LEN 30
FIELD UTITLE FNO 1 LEN 30 CONV "MCU"
(etc)
FIELD PRICE FNO 6 MONEY
ENDDEFN
BEGIN TABLE BOOK_SALES
...
FIELD TITLE_ID FNO 10 NUMERIC MVED
FIELD QTY FNO 11 NUMERIC MVED DEPENDS TITLE_ID
...
FIELD LINE_TOTAL EXPR \QTY * PRICE\ MONEY MVED DEPENDS TITLE_ID
...
ENDDEFN
I then have a very simple program that parses this and builds the
dictionaries accordingly.
Why?
So that I can put the script into source control, and handle it just
like
any other source item, and easily rebuild the dictionaries by running
the
scripts again.
I can also version stamp the script along with the rest of my source
code.
I've recently written an article for Spectrum on version stamping
(should be
in this issue but I haven't got a copy yet!). Version stamping is one of
those critical client/server things - ensuring that the right version of
the
client is talking to the right version of the server.
There's no point getting the client side right in terms of version
management, and then forgetting the server.
Which leads on to a shameless plug ...
My mvInstaller program builds setups for deploying multivalue
applications.
One of my clients is using it to handle rollouts to 250 (that's right)
servers in a distributed system. It is based on the installer I wrote at
MMT
- that saved me more time than anything else in terms of QA as well as
deployment. It supports windows and server based installations, creates
files, installs data and programs, executes commands and runs
subroutines:
and amongst its many useful features the installations can be version
sensitive.
And the setup definitions are scripts, so they can be version managed.
If you're building windows setups for the client, don't forget the
server.
Read more on my website: www.[removethis]brianleach.co.uk
Brian
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin King
> Sent: 17 January 2007 02:42
> To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
> Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team
> System 2005 {Unclassified}
>
> Really, couldn't it be also argued that - along with what
> Clif has mentioned - that ALL dictionaries - even phrases -
> are code to be under control as well, not just I-descriptors.
> If a dictionary changes, things could get ugly.
>
> -Kevin
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System [not-secure] 2005 {Unclassified}
Am I the only one who has received this message three times?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bobby Worley
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:56 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
2005 {Unclassified}
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Leach
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 3:42 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team System
2005 {Unclassified}
Kevin
Absolutely agreed: dictionaries have a strange place in the MV world
since
they can be user defined for a useful report, but changes might screw up
a
selection required for a program. Which, as we all know, can be bad bad
BAD.
My approach has been to make everything 'source'. Rather than create
dictionaries directly (urgh) I create a simple script to define one or
more
files - a bit like CREATE TABLE but just for regular files. An example
might
look like this:
BEGIN TABLE BOOK_TITLES
SUBJECT "Audio Book Titles"
FIELD TITLE_ID FNO 0 NUMERIC
FIELD SHORT_TITLE FNO 1 LEN 30
FIELD UTITLE FNO 1 LEN 30 CONV "MCU"
(etc)
FIELD PRICE FNO 6 MONEY
ENDDEFN
BEGIN TABLE BOOK_SALES
...
FIELD TITLE_ID FNO 10 NUMERIC MVED
FIELD QTY FNO 11 NUMERIC MVED DEPENDS TITLE_ID
...
FIELD LINE_TOTAL EXPR \QTY * PRICE\ MONEY MVED DEPENDS TITLE_ID
...
ENDDEFN
I then have a very simple program that parses this and builds the
dictionaries accordingly.
Why?
So that I can put the script into source control, and handle it just
like
any other source item, and easily rebuild the dictionaries by running
the
scripts again.
I can also version stamp the script along with the rest of my source
code.
I've recently written an article for Spectrum on version stamping
(should be
in this issue but I haven't got a copy yet!). Version stamping is one of
those critical client/server things - ensuring that the right version of
the
client is talking to the right version of the server.
There's no point getting the client side right in terms of version
management, and then forgetting the server.
Which leads on to a shameless plug ...
My mvInstaller program builds setups for deploying multivalue
applications.
One of my clients is using it to handle rollouts to 250 (that's right)
servers in a distributed system. It is based on the installer I wrote at
MMT
- that saved me more time than anything else in terms of QA as well as
deployment. It supports windows and server based installations, creates
files, installs data and programs, executes commands and runs
subroutines:
and amongst its many useful features the installations can be version
sensitive.
And the setup definitions are scripts, so they can be version managed.
If you're building windows setups for the client, don't forget the
server.
Read more on my website: www.[removethis]brianleach.co.uk
Brian
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin King
> Sent: 17 January 2007 02:42
> To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
> Subject: RE: [U2] Integration of UniVerse with Microsoft Team
> System 2005 {Unclassified}
>
> Really, couldn't it be also argued that - along with what
> Clif has mentioned - that ALL dictionaries - even phrases -
> are code to be under control as well, not just I-descriptors.
> If a dictionary changes, things could get ugly.
>
> -Kevin
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
