Home » Archived » EPF » Comments from Training
| Comments from Training [message #44271] |
Wed, 17 October 2007 17:55  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: Sevon.Vanbebber.baesystems.com
I am currently training other's in how to use EPFC and there have been a
couple items brought to my attention that I thought I would share with you
guys. I have been hands on with this tool 90% of my time for the last 4
months, so I can overlook some of the difficult items to understand, but
the new users are not as accepting.
First, when adding tasks from method content into Process, it looks up
items through Disciplines, or from "uncategorized tasks." Why are we not
looking up information from the content packages? This has been a major
sticking point for the trainee's because we don't currently use
disciplines for all of our tasks, so I have gotten in the habbit of
creating disciplines just for the sake of finding tasks, which creates an
extra step in development. New users see this as having to organize their
information again, which has been received very poorly.
Another item, I have read through a lot of the papers and other
information written by the EPF team, and I have never really seen a
graphic that shows how everything is linked together in the tool besides
the vin diagram graphic and the graphic with the 3 images on the left hand
side pointing to the editor, which are more theory than application. Is
there a lower level representation of actually how things are interelated
through editing in the tool and what the aplication is of each of the
Categories? I understand that it is really complicated, which is why I
have not created one myself, but I also dont know a lot of the
justification of why things are the way they are and thought that maybe
you guys would have something that I havent seen yet :)
The way that I have been training, is I have divided creating process into
4 roles:
1. Creating Content and their innerelations (through content packages)
2. Editing Content (also, through content packages)
3. Relating Content to one another (through Standard Categories and
Process)
4. Architecting User Views
Creating and Editing content went really smoothly, however, the last 2
invoked a lot of questions that I haven't found EPF answers to, just, well
this is how/why I do it the ways that I do. If you have any direction to
point me to, to learn more about process and architecting and why
decisions were made in OpenUP to make it the way it is, I would greatly
appreciate that as well.
Side note, will any of you be at the Rational Product event in La
Jolla/San Diego October 30th? If so, I would like to meet you!
Thanks!
Sevon
|
|
|
| Re: Comments from Training [message #44521 is a reply to message #44271] |
Wed, 17 October 2007 23:37  |
 Peter Haumer
Messages: 228
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi. Replies inline:
"Sevon Vanbebber" <Sevon.Vanbebber@baesystems.com> wrote in message
news:07dfcc2b21a29c491a8a7bf354a786b3$1@www.eclipse.org...
> First, when adding tasks from method content into Process, it looks up
> items through Disciplines, or from "uncategorized tasks." Why are we not
> looking up information from the content packages? This has been a major
> sticking point for the trainee's because we don't currently use
> disciplines for all of our tasks, so I have gotten in the habbit of
> creating disciplines just for the sake of finding tasks, which creates an
> extra step in development. New users see this as having to organize their
> information again, which has been received very poorly.
What you are looking at when you do this actually is the logical method
configuration under which you are authoring your process and not the
physical library anymore. EPFC let's you organize your method elements in
an aspect-like way using variability. I.e. a task or work product that you
want to add to your process can be defined in many different places (i.e.
packages and plugins) using variability such as Contribution or Replacement
and has been merged into one element now for this dialog.
However, many other user also requested what you want to do so for this we
allowed the ability in EPFC 1.2 now
to drag and drop elements from the Library View which is organized into
packages. However, I recommend against using this feature as the Library
View shows you all elements of the library. The Configuration View or the
dialog that you are referring to however, show you the elements that you are
allowed to drag into the process, which is much better for the unexperienced
user.
> Another item, I have read through a lot of the papers and other
> information written by the EPF team, and I have never really seen a
> graphic that shows how everything is linked together in the tool besides
> the vin diagram graphic and the graphic with the 3 images on the left hand
> side pointing to the editor, which are more theory than application. Is
> there a lower level representation of actually how things are interelated
> through editing in the tool and what the aplication is of each of the
> Categories? I understand that it is really complicated, which is why I
> have not created one myself, but I also dont know a lot of the
> justification of why things are the way they are and thought that maybe
> you guys would have something that I havent seen yet :)
Mmh. There is some high-level material out there on our Getting Started page
as well as other sites such as the one from Number Six Software or Armstrong
Process Group. Rational is also offering a three day training class in
which we teach the concepts with a lot of additional material and pictures
that we did not donate to open source. (We have to make some money with some
things.) To get all the details you could check-out the meta-model in CVS:
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.eclipse.epf/plu gins/org.eclipse.epf.uma/model/1.0.4/UnifiedMethodArchitectu re.emx?root=Technology_Project&view=co
I still own the community the actual specification document, but as there is
a strong overlap I can point you to the SPEM 2 specification for some more
conceptual details: http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/07-08-07
> The way that I have been training, is I have divided creating process into
> 4 roles:
>
> 1. Creating Content and their innerelations (through content packages)
> 2. Editing Content (also, through content packages)
> 3. Relating Content to one another (through Standard Categories and
> Process)
> 4. Architecting User Views
As outlined in my other post about the CC usage. We recommend these roles:
- Method Architectect: identifying and creating method plugins and their
dependencies as well as configurations
- Method Designer: identifying and modeling elements within a plugin
- Content Author: documenting elements and detailing processes
> Creating and Editing content went really smoothly, however, the last 2
> invoked a lot of questions that I haven't found EPF answers to, just, well
> this is how/why I do it the ways that I do. If you have any direction to
> point me to, to learn more about process and architecting and why
> decisions were made in OpenUP to make it the way it is, I would greatly
> appreciate that as well.
Check out this paper about a method authoring method:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/feb07/per aire/
> Side note, will any of you be at the Rational Product event in La
> Jolla/San Diego October 30th? If so, I would like to meet you!
>
> Thanks!
> Sevon
>
|
|
|
| Re: Comments from Training [message #44608 is a reply to message #44271] |
Thu, 18 October 2007 03:29 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: tony.tatil.gmail.com
The option of using IBM Global Services is always available to you. Just
imagine the fun you are going to have when you start dealing with SCM,
branching, merging, etc. You need a complete ALM solution to use this tool
for creation and tailoring SD processes.
Like what we used to say in our university days:
EPF composer is good looking from far but, far from good looking.
Tony
|
|
|
| Re: Comments from Training [message #585091 is a reply to message #44271] |
Wed, 17 October 2007 23:37 |
Peter Haumer
Messages: 228
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi. Replies inline:
"Sevon Vanbebber" <Sevon.Vanbebber@baesystems.com> wrote in message
news:07dfcc2b21a29c491a8a7bf354a786b3$1@www.eclipse.org...
> First, when adding tasks from method content into Process, it looks up
> items through Disciplines, or from "uncategorized tasks." Why are we not
> looking up information from the content packages? This has been a major
> sticking point for the trainee's because we don't currently use
> disciplines for all of our tasks, so I have gotten in the habbit of
> creating disciplines just for the sake of finding tasks, which creates an
> extra step in development. New users see this as having to organize their
> information again, which has been received very poorly.
What you are looking at when you do this actually is the logical method
configuration under which you are authoring your process and not the
physical library anymore. EPFC let's you organize your method elements in
an aspect-like way using variability. I.e. a task or work product that you
want to add to your process can be defined in many different places (i.e.
packages and plugins) using variability such as Contribution or Replacement
and has been merged into one element now for this dialog.
However, many other user also requested what you want to do so for this we
allowed the ability in EPFC 1.2 now
to drag and drop elements from the Library View which is organized into
packages. However, I recommend against using this feature as the Library
View shows you all elements of the library. The Configuration View or the
dialog that you are referring to however, show you the elements that you are
allowed to drag into the process, which is much better for the unexperienced
user.
> Another item, I have read through a lot of the papers and other
> information written by the EPF team, and I have never really seen a
> graphic that shows how everything is linked together in the tool besides
> the vin diagram graphic and the graphic with the 3 images on the left hand
> side pointing to the editor, which are more theory than application. Is
> there a lower level representation of actually how things are interelated
> through editing in the tool and what the aplication is of each of the
> Categories? I understand that it is really complicated, which is why I
> have not created one myself, but I also dont know a lot of the
> justification of why things are the way they are and thought that maybe
> you guys would have something that I havent seen yet :)
Mmh. There is some high-level material out there on our Getting Started page
as well as other sites such as the one from Number Six Software or Armstrong
Process Group. Rational is also offering a three day training class in
which we teach the concepts with a lot of additional material and pictures
that we did not donate to open source. (We have to make some money with some
things.) To get all the details you could check-out the meta-model in CVS:
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.eclipse.epf/plu gins/org.eclipse.epf.uma/model/1.0.4/UnifiedMethodArchitectu re.emx?root=Technology_Project&view=co
I still own the community the actual specification document, but as there is
a strong overlap I can point you to the SPEM 2 specification for some more
conceptual details: http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/07-08-07
> The way that I have been training, is I have divided creating process into
> 4 roles:
>
> 1. Creating Content and their innerelations (through content packages)
> 2. Editing Content (also, through content packages)
> 3. Relating Content to one another (through Standard Categories and
> Process)
> 4. Architecting User Views
As outlined in my other post about the CC usage. We recommend these roles:
- Method Architectect: identifying and creating method plugins and their
dependencies as well as configurations
- Method Designer: identifying and modeling elements within a plugin
- Content Author: documenting elements and detailing processes
> Creating and Editing content went really smoothly, however, the last 2
> invoked a lot of questions that I haven't found EPF answers to, just, well
> this is how/why I do it the ways that I do. If you have any direction to
> point me to, to learn more about process and architecting and why
> decisions were made in OpenUP to make it the way it is, I would greatly
> appreciate that as well.
Check out this paper about a method authoring method:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/feb07/per aire/
> Side note, will any of you be at the Rational Product event in La
> Jolla/San Diego October 30th? If so, I would like to meet you!
>
> Thanks!
> Sevon
>
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 25 04:37:12 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03169 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
