Questions about Starteam provider

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Questions about Starteam provider

Robert Egan

I've been looking at the maven documentation and the source code for the starteam provider and have some quick questions.

1) StarteamAddCommand, StarteamRemoveCommand do not have a corresponding scm goal
listed on page http://maven.apache.org/scm/plugins/. Is this because they are undocumented, or that they are required by the framework for some kind of internal processing?

2) StarteamEditCommand, StarteamUneditCommand are implemented although the Matrix says they are not (http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SCM/SCM+Matrix). Is the Matrix out of date, or is there some other reason for listing them as not implemented?


3) Does the provider or individual command implementations <i>have</i> to use a command line framework, or was that just done for ease of implementation?
The reason I ask is that our build environment uses Starteam in a manner that exposes a design flaw in their checkout process (I can provide details if anyone asks, but it's not really relevant to the discussion).


Thanks

Robert Egan



Confidential, proprietary or non-public information.  The information is intended solely for the designated recipient(s).  If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email.  Any review, dissemination, use or reliance upon this information by unintended recipients is prohibited.  Any opinions expressed in this email are those of the author personally.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Questions about Starteam provider

Emmanuel Venisse-2


[hidden email] a écrit :
>
> I've been looking at the maven documentation and the source code for the
> starteam provider and have some quick questions.
>
> 1) StarteamAddCommand, StarteamRemoveCommand do not have a corresponding
> scm goal listed on page http://maven.apache.org/scm/plugins/. Is this
> because they are undocumented, or that they are required by the
> framework for some kind of internal processing?

add goal is implemented and remove goal isn't. I don't know why add goal isn't on the site. I'll look at it.

>
> 2) StarteamEditCommand, StarteamUneditCommand are implemented although
> the Matrix says they are not
> (http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SCM/SCM+Matrix). Is the Matrix out of
> date, or is there some other reason for listing them as not implemented?

Fixed.

>
> 3) Does the provider or individual command implementations <i>have</i>
> to use a command line framework, or was that just done for ease of
> implementation? The reason I ask is that our build environment uses
> Starteam in a manner that exposes a design flaw in their checkout
> process (I can provide details if anyone asks, but it's not really
> relevant to the discussion).

We use starteam cli to run command because we can't redistribute starteam jars.

Emmanuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Questions about Starteam provider

Robert Egan

Emmanuel Venisse <[hidden email]> wrote on 09/27/2007 07:36:48 AM:

> >
> > 3) Does the provider or individual command implementations <i>have</i>
> > to use a command line framework, or was that just done for ease of
> > implementation? The reason I ask is that our build environment uses
> > Starteam in a manner that exposes a design flaw in their checkout
> > process (I can provide details if anyone asks, but it's not really
> > relevant to the discussion).
>
> We use starteam cli to run command because we can't redistribute
> starteam jars.
>

Thanks. This is not an issue for us because our local repository will be accessible only to those developers who have a valid Starteam license anyway. The sad part is that my implementation cannot be shared back to Maven :(.

However, I do have some positive feedback. I have created SCM-347 in JIRA and placed it there.

I would also like to promote issue SCM-117. It looks like discussion stopped on 12/23/2006 and that no further work was done. Implementing this will really improve the usefulness of stcmd, which has dozens of options (like the three listed in SCM-347) that you might not want to explicitely support, because they are used less frequently and/or do not fit into the SCM model.

As the original reporter OF SCM-117 indicated, the most useful argument by far is -o (force checkout) because Starteam has real issues with repository synchronization (SCM-142). This is a Starteam problem and one that can only be solved by the force checkout option or through the Starteam SDK, which contains calls to explicitely synchronize.


Robert Egan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Questions about Starteam provider

Dan Tran
feelfree to submit the patch, of course with unit test, as long as it
follows maven scm architechutre.  I will review and commit

Thanks

-D

On 9/27/07, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Emmanuel Venisse <[hidden email]> wrote on 09/27/2007 07:36:48 AM:
>
> > >
> > > 3) Does the provider or individual command implementations <i>have</i>
> > > to use a command line framework, or was that just done for ease of
> > > implementation? The reason I ask is that our build environment uses
> > > Starteam in a manner that exposes a design flaw in their checkout
> > > process (I can provide details if anyone asks, but it's not really
> > > relevant to the discussion).
> >
> > We use starteam cli to run command because we can't redistribute
> > starteam jars.
> >
>
> Thanks. This is not an issue for us because our local repository will be
> accessible only to those developers who have a valid Starteam license
> anyway. The sad part is that my implementation cannot be shared back to
> Maven :(.
>
> However, I do have some positive feedback. I have created SCM-347 in JIRA
> and placed it there.
>
> I would also like to promote issue SCM-117. It looks like discussion stopped
> on 12/23/2006 and that no further work was done. Implementing this will
> really improve the usefulness of stcmd, which has dozens of options (like
> the three listed in SCM-347) that you might not want to explicitely support,
> because they are used less frequently and/or do not fit into the SCM model.
>
> As the original reporter OF SCM-117 indicated, the most useful argument by
> far is -o (force checkout) because Starteam has real issues with repository
> synchronization (SCM-142). This is a Starteam problem and one that can only
> be solved by the force checkout option or through the Starteam SDK, which
> contains calls to explicitely synchronize.
>
>
> Robert Egan
>