![]() |
Telelogic DOORS (steve huntington) | ![]() |
new topic :
profile :
search :
help :
dashboard :
calendar :
home
|
||
Latest News:
|
|
Topic Title: Best practice for linkset manitenance? Topic Summary: Created On: 24-Mar-2008 09:48 Status: Post and Reply |
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch |
![]() |
![]()
|
![]() |
|
I have 3 kinds of documents that must be linked between each other. They are called GTD, PS & PC. There are 5 of each of them. All the 5 GTDs are in one folder (with subfolders in it) & so is the case with PS & PC documents. For now, I have created 3 link modules & defined link mappings in formal modules. Link modules are called
1. Links from GTD->this contains all the linksets originating from all 5 GTD docs. It is in the root of folder that contains GTD docs. Similary, 2. Links from PS 3.Links from PC Now, is this clever to have just 1 link module for all links originating from 5 modules or is it easier to have 1 link module for all links originating from each module? Which is more maintanable? Has anybody tried the above & are there any pros & cons? Any words of wisdom from your experiences will be great. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
The first question that should be asked -- What strategy best meets your process.
From the info you gave -- there is not enough info to deduce your process therefore any recommendation about "easy of maintenance" is not very relevant. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
We use a similar concept and it seems to be working well. Our structure pans out something like this:
Requirement Level (System Requirement, High Level Requirement, etc.) ---Line Replaceable Unit A ----- Formal Modules ----- Link Module --- Line Replaceable Unit B ----- Formal Modules ----- Link Module Basically for each requirements level, a directory is created for the LRU where all the requirements modules are maintained for that LRU with one link module for all the modules in that directory. Now keep in mind we have a large system, that contains several LRU's and occasionally our tracing crosses LRU's which isn't a big deal because we do not allow "sideways" tracing (i.e. HLR -> HLR), all our tracing goes up from source code to LLR to HLR to SYSR etc... So each link module contains all the links for that LRU up to the higher requirement levels. ------------------------- Scott Boisvert Engineering Tools Administrator L-3 Communications - Avionics Systems scott.boisvert@l-3com.com |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
I want to explain more on what we are trying to achieve.
GTD or General Technical modules have links to them from the PS or Performance Specs modules & PC (Conditions Modules). PC modules have links to and from both GTD & PS modules. PS modules too have links to & from GTD & PC. There are also links between the PS modules. Links are not going anywhere else apart from the above in this project. I have two options I feel- 1. Have one link module that contains all linkset pairings with one single module as source module.(either a GTD or PS or PC) 2. Or like how I have now: Have a single link module for all linkset pairings where there are multiple source modules (all GTD or all PS modules). |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
As I previously stated, I feel that the question you are asking "What is easiest" is the wrong question.
Some of the question that should be asked. What is the amount of training do you want to provide the users?- I have been at places that were adamant about leaving the default as they were because they felt their engineers weren't smart enough to learn to use anything but the default. What granularity of control do you want to have on enforcing linksets? Having lots of link modules can give the ambitious person lots of control but cause a great deal of management effort. What granularity do you want the users have in creating views and filters. Lots of modules lets user devise filters/views that are precise. But on the flip side the filter creation tool and view wizards do not let users select multiple link modules. So this raises the question -- is there a dxl person on staff that can refine views/filters? With control there is an administration cost -- with ease of use there is loss of fidelity. So an additional question is -- what is ultimate use of DOORS? Is DOORS just a temporary tool to satisfy a customer requirements? Or is DOORS going to become a standard in the company? Other users may choose to add to this list of question? Unless you are willing to answer these types of questions -- probably the correct answer is KISS. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
I have been at places that were adamant about leaving the default as they were because they felt their engineers weren't smart enough to learn to use anything but the default. I only wish they were that adamant here....They have far too high expectations of our engineers....... ------------------------- Scott Boisvert Engineering Tools Administrator L-3 Communications - Avionics Systems scott.boisvert@l-3com.com |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dear Ron
I read though the forum & found that many people had advised not use the Default Link Module for creating links. I deleted the default link module in every folder & have made the linkset pairings only through the above 3 link modules (mandatory, only allow outgoing links in these directions). I want to make sure users have minimum rights with administration, if they need some linkset mappings to be setup, they should come to us, raise a request. All Users are been given the basic 2 days training. The idea is to make DOORS Standard tool ion the Organization, I know the starting patch looks rough. I will be having to do any DXL stuff required. I'm a learner, not complete pro.Therefore I'm trying to understand what will be easy for me to do maintainence in coming times- too many or few link modules? As I said, we are just starting now, from sctrach, & trying to implement best practices. Ofcourse, am being a bit greedy & hoping that there will be some way a best practice is implemented that is easy to use & has no loss of fidelity. Regards Roy Edited: 26-Mar-2008 at 06:06 by Sheela Roy |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dear Ron
|
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
here is a link for you
https://forum.telelogic.com/customer/doors/messageview.cfm?catid=58&threadid=5156&enterthread=y |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
And here is another link just about link modules:
DOORS Link Modules Explained ------------------------- Kevin Murphy http://www.baselinesinc.com |
|
![]() |
Telelogic DOORS
» Administration
»
Best practice for linkset manitenance?
|
![]() |
FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2009 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.