Any opinions for or against using ClearCase/ClearQuest with UCM? We're
considering using it on a large project (millions of lines of code and
a couple hundred users--if you include requirements writers,
architects, testers and designer/coders. Our legacy projects have used
ClearCase and a home grown change management tool. Though that tool
has served us well, it looks like the integration between CC and CQ as
well as the process constaints of UCM may be a good thing. But then
again maybe not. We're moving to a totally new phase in our baselines,
so we have the opportunity to rewrite rules and processes and to select
new tools.

Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

Ken

> We're moving to a totally new phase in our baselines,

I can't answer directly, but I can relate an issue we stumbled over...
We're on totally different scales here (my group has ~10 developers,
and the largest team is only 3 people), but I think some of this might
still apply.

In our switch to a new (first real) SCM setup, I've encountered a lot
of resistance to the change. My first proposal was pretty different
from what we did before, and so the developers did not want to adopt
using a new tool or any sort of external suggestions to a development
process (pretty much everything here relating to software dev was "do
it your own way"; process consultants are not well received). I had
managerial approval, but I would hesitate to call it "backing" (which
is somewhat good - it encouraged discussion amongst the developers,
and, in retrospect, we're better for it).

My point is that any change in how developers do things, especially if
it's more restrictive than what you are doing now, may be met with some
resistance. Gently guiding to encourage good software dev practice
seems better received (and more likely to be followed) than forcing
process. I'm not sure how much that applies to UCM; I'm only vaguely
familiar with it.

However, it sounds like you have managerial backing (so you may be able
to mandate process) as well as a much stronger need to restrict the
flow (since there are hundreds of contributors).

What other tools / processes have you considered?


-Sean Wedig

kk_oop@yahoo.com wrote:

Hi Ken,


I think that having a good look at UCM + ClearQuest is a good idea. I
happen to believe that any decent development process should have
change management tightly integrated with source control. In fact, In
fact, dev groups who get used to this process find it very hard to look
back or change to something that does not offer this functionality. I
also like the concept of composite baselines, where you can aggregate
components which are built/delivered as independent products into a
larger product and be able to reproduce your entire release when you
need to. I believe the admin side of things gets better when comparing
UCM to Base CC. On the other hand, I have seen people who advise that
if you have already invested in scripting out your process with Base,
and it works for your team, then moving to UCM is not necessarily the
best thing to do. But if change management integration is what you are
after, then I would say that having a good look at UCM is worth it.


Cheers,
Cristian