DNG - Product Roadmap for Module Context vs Base Artifact
Most of the consultants and organisations I have canvassed have said that they do base artifact linking because it feels safer to have important traceability information associated directly with the artifacts rather than one step removed through the presentation layer of a module.
|
2 answers
Another problematic issue with DNG's evolvement is the behavior of base vrs module artifacts.
Back in 4.x "artifact reuse" was a noted feature in that you could include the base artifact in a number of modules. On changing the artifact within the context of the module, only that module saw the change to the artifact. if you changed the base artifact, all modules that used it also reflected the change. (At least this was what we were told and did not note any behavior to the contrary.)
Fast forward to 6X (we're at 6.0.5) - somewhere between then and now, this changed. In 605 we noted that changing the artifact within a module, changes the base artifact which in turn affects all modules that call it. This was unexpected behavior and troublesome in that it now changes modules unbeknownst to the user. The artifact change may only have been application to the one module.
|
Those of us who develop in a regulated environment have a clear need for "artifact reuse" in the form of requirements that derive for standards and regulations. These requirements apply to many products and must be reused identically!. These artifacts are very important to keep correct/unchanging, until the standard changes, then we need to trace changes to applicable product modules.
How do I keep random users from changing the artifact within a module, and triggering changes across the product line?
|
Your answer
Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.