CLM Case Study An investigation of deployment options for IBM Rational Team Concert in a ClearCase/ClearQuest environment July 18, 2011 Michael Gormley.

CLM Case StudyAn investigation of deployment options for IBM Rational Team

Concert in a ClearCase/ClearQuest environment

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Agenda• Background• CLM Defined• Why CLM?• Architectural Options• Integration Terminology• Version Control Options• Change Tracking Options• Key Deployment Considerations• Deployment Examples• Where do we go next?

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Background• Why do a case study?

• Customers trying to implement solutions with Jazz, ClearCase, and ClearQuest• Current ClearCase and ClearQuest users want to take advantage of Jazz functionality

• Obstacles• Perception that moving to Jazz means abandoning ClearCase and ClearQuest• Migration path from CC/CQ to Jazz is unclear

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Background (continued)• Goals

• Investigate and define deployment options for Jazz in CC/CQ environments• Provide recommendations for how to deploy Jazz based on customer business needs• Configure demonstration environment with:

• Jazz/CLM• Rational Team Concert• Rational Requirements Composer• Rational Quality Manager

• ClearCase• ClearQuest

• Scope• Jazz Team Server and CLM 3.0.1• ClearCase/ClearQuest 7.1.2

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

CLM Defined• Collaborative Lifecycle Management

• As a concept:• The coordination of software development activities across business and system requirements, design, development, build, test, and delivery

• As a product:• An integrated release of Rational Team Concert, Rational Requirements Composer, and Rational Quality Manager, built on a Jazz Team Server• Version 3.0.1 released on 6/14/2011

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

CLM Defined (continued)

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Why CLM?• Why add to CC and CQ:

• Integrated requirements and quality management• Flexible project dashboards• Integrated project planning• Eclipse-based development client• Built-in build/process automation• “Social” collaboration

• Why start with CLM:• Free for up to 10 developers• Built-in version control and change management

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Architectural Options• Operating System

• 32 and 64 bit supported (for now)• Expect to use 64 bit O/S w/maximum memory• Multi-processor servers

• Web Server Options• Apache Tomcat 5.5.30 (bundled)• Websphere Application Server 6.1 or 7.0

• Database Options• Derby 10.5 (bundled)• Oracle 10 or 11• DB2 9.5 or 9.7• SQL Server 2005 or 2008

• Options in red were investigated during case study

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Integration Terminology• Three “integration” options:• Importer

• One-way data migration• Transfer management from current tool to CLM

• Bridge• Provides link from CLM into current tool• Creates “loose coupling” – CLM UI navigation to invoke current tools • Simplest one to write if doesn’t already exist

• Synchronizer (aka Connector)• Two-way synchronization of data between current tool and corresponding CLM data• Intended to support parallel efforts in both repositories

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Version Control Options• Version Control Choices

• ClearCase (bridge, synchronizer)• Synergy (bridge+)• CVS (bridge)• Subversion (bridge)• GIT (bridge)• Jazz Source Control (built-in)

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Version Control (continued)• ClearCase Bridge

• Use CCRC for web views• Use Eclipse SCM Adapter for snapshot or dynamic views• Source control stays in ClearCase• Supports linking of file changes to Jazz work items or to ClearQuest records (using ClearQuest bridge)

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Version Control (continued)• ClearCase Synchronizer

• Allows some work to be done in Jazz Source Control and be synchronized with ClearCase• ClearCase continues to be the master repository• Supports both Base CC and UCM• Done in background

• Using “Jazz Synchronization Engine”

• Jazz Source Control• Change set/stream-based SCM system• Distributed SCM support• Built-in, so shares repository with other Jazz applications• Can be populated from ClearCase via importer

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Change Tracking Options• Change Tracking Choices

• ClearQuest (bridge, synchronizer)• Change (bridge)• Jazz Work Items (built-in)

• ClearQuest Bridge• Uses CQ Web as access point from CLM• Change records stay in ClearQuest• Supports linking of CQ records to Jazz work items (optional)• Linked records travel independently• Jazz reporting is based on work items, so value of reports is frequently lost

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Change Tracking (continued)• ClearQuest Synchronizer

• Allows selected work items to be synchronized with ClearQuest records – could preserve Jazz reporting• Done in background (Jazz synchronization engine)• Requires rules to be defined for each record type field to be synchronized• Conflicts must be manually resolved by administrator• Rational discourages its use

• Jazz Work Items• Supports different types (analogous to CQ record types)• Limited customizability (but growing)• Built-in, so shares repository with other Jazz applications• Can be populated from ClearQuest via importer

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Key Deployment Considerations• Complexity of ClearCase environment:

• Number of VOB/View servers• Number of supported users/clients• Use of MultiSite• Use of UCM• Integration with ClearQuest (V2 and/or UCM)

• Desire to work with Jazz source control• Complexity of ClearQuest environment:

• Number of record types• Amount of hook code written• Other customization

• Business need for Requirements Management• Business need for Test Management• Business value of built-in Jazz reporting

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Deployment examples• New development, no known need for custom processes, small team size, but needs source control, change tracking, requirements and test management:

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Deployment examples (cont’d)• Current CC/CQ user, base CC, no integration w/CQ, out-of-the-box CQ schema, wants RTC planning, reporting, and test management:

July 18, 2011

Bridge Importer

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Deployment examples (cont’d)• Current CC/CQ user, CQ-enabled UCM, custom CQ schema, wants RTC planning and dashboards:

July 18, 2011

Bridge Bridge

Note: dual maintenance of CQ records and RTC work items

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Deployment examples (cont’d)• Current CC/CQ user, custom CC/CQ integration, custom CQ

schema, wants RTC planning, dashboards, reporting, requirements and test management, wants to shift some version control into RTC, and wants CQ record status reflected in RTC work items

July 18, 2011

Synchronizer Synchronizer

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

Where do we go next?• Repeat case study, using CLM 3.0.1

• Need to run on 64-bit machine, multiple CPUs• Windows Server 2008 R2

• Finish investigation of configuration issues with WAS

• Use WAS 7.0, fixpack 9• Keep separate from CM Server used by CC/CQ

• Deeper assessment of customizability and synchronization options

• ClearQuest vs. Jazz Work Items

July 18, 2011

Michael Gormley, Senior Consultant ReleaseTEAM, Inc.

QUESTIONS?

July 18, 2011